00001 Volume 1 of 111 SJAR ROT FOIA Version VERBAT IM 1 RECORD OF TRIAL2 (and accompanying papers) of (Name: Last, First, Middie initiai) (Sociai Security Number) (Rank) Headquarters and Headquarters Company, United States Army Garrison U-S- Army Fort Myer, VA 22211 (Unit/Command Name) (Branch of Service) (Station or Ship) By GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL convened by Commander (Titie of Con vening Authority) UNITED STATES ARMY MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON (Unit/Command of Con vening Authority) Tried at Fort. Meade, MD on see below (Piace or Piaces of Triai) (Date or Dates of Triai) Date or Dates of Trial: 23 February 2012, 15?16 March 2012, 24?26 April 2012, 6?8 June 2012, 25 June 2012, 16?19 July 2012, 28?30 August 20l2, 2 October 2012, 12 October 2012, 17?18 October 2012, 7?8 November 2012, 27 November 2 December 2012, 5?7 December 2012, 10?11 December 2012, 8?9 January 2013, 16 January 2013, 26 February 1 March 2013, 8 March 2013, 10 April 2013, 7?8 May 2013, 21 May 2013, 3?5 June 2013, 10?12 JUne 2013, 17?18 June 2013, 25?28 June 2013, 1?2 July 2013, 8?10 July 2013, 15 July 2013, 18?19 July 2013, 25?26 July 2013, 28 July 2 August 2013, 5?9 August 2013, 12?14 August 2013, 16 August 2013, and 19?21 August 2013. 1 insert "verbatim or "summarized as appropriate. This form be used by the Army and Navy for verbatim records of triai oniy.) 2 See inside back co ver for instructions as to preparation and arrangement. DD FORM 490, MAY 2000 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE Front Cover 00002 POST-TRIAL DOCUMENTS PAPERWORK PERTAINING TO CONFINEMENT 00003 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY US ARMY INSTALLATION MANAGEMENT COMMAND JOINT BASE MYER - HENDERSON HALL MILITARY PERSONNEL DIVISION 106 CUSTER ROAD, BUILDING 202 FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211?1199 ORDERS 235 48 24 AUGUST 2013 MANNING, BRADLEY PV1 HHC USAG (wouc01) FORT MYER, VA 22211 You will proceed on permanent change of station as indicated. Assigned to: PERSONNEL CONTROL FACILITY (W6CSPR) FT. SILL, OK WITH CONFINEMENT AT THE UNITED STATES ARMY DISCIPLINARY BARRACKS, FT. LEAVENWORTH, KS 66027 Reporting date: 22 AUGUST 2013 (VOCDR CONFIRMED) Additional instructions: Sentencing in accordance with DD Form 2707 (Confinement Order) signed by CPT Von Elten Alexander, JA, (Trial Counsel). FOR ARMY USE: Auth: AR 27 10 Pers con no: NA MDC: 7BE3 Asg to dsg: NA indic: NOT APPLICABLE Control specialty: NONE PPD: NONE Pers scty code: NA PMOS: NA SDN: MAN9504PL23548 Format: 410 FOR THE COMMANDER: DISTRIBUTION: (1) LAW DIV, BLDG 32, FORT MCNAIR, DC 20319 (3) PCF, FT. SILL, OK (3) HHC USAG, FT. MYER, VA 22211 PV1 MANNING (15) 00004 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ARMY CORRECTIONS COMMAND 150 ARMY PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC 200100150 REPLY TO INTENTION OF DAPM-ACC 22 August 13 MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Transfer of Prisoner 1. The transfer of the following prisoner(s) to the USDB at Ft Leavenworth has been approved by this office. Name: Mannin Bradley 850* Grade: E-3 Losing Unit; HHC, USAG, JBH-HH. Ft. MYER VA 22211 Charge(s): 134, 92 Date Adjudged: 21 Aug 13 Sentence: 35 Years PTA: None Presentence Confinement21181 Admin Credit: 112 Discharge: DD Alcohol Related: No Age: 25 Service: Arm COM: E-mail: Transfer date: 22 Aug 13 2. Remarks: 3. POC for this memorandum ls Larry kester or Laura Mitchell at DSN ?oom Correctional Program pecialist 00005 .DAPM-ACC 13 Mar 13 MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Department of Army Confinement Procedures Checklist 1. IAW AR 190-47, based on operational requirements and programs, Army Corrections Command (ACC) will determine place of incarceration for all Army prisoners who are sentenced to confinement beyond 30 days. Notification of summary remaining in local contract jails is required, including the required confinement documents and confinement checklist. Local contract jails may not be used to confine adjudged prisoners beyond 30 days without prior approval from ACC. 2. The enciosed checklist is required for any Courts-Martial resulting in a sentence to confinement and will be completely filled out by the primary SJA FCC/representative. required documents will be scanned and emailed to Mike Chvojka, Laura Mitchell and Lar Kester at faxed to DSN (do not fax the MPR and ROI. They wi be hand carried by escorts). 3. Reassignment orders: Soldiers who receive a sentence of 121 days or more confinement without a punitive discharge/dismissal, or?adjudged a punitive discharge/dismissal will be administratively assigned to the appropriate PCF with confinement at the designated correctional IAW AR 600?62, Para 3-12. For those prisoners that do not meet the criteria for reassignment the commander/186 contact information is required (e-mail, phone, and address). 4. The transfer date is coordinated with ACC and the SJA representative/losing unit. The ACC designated transfer date is the expected arrival date and is not an on or about date. if the unit is unable to complete the mission on the designated date, ACC or the gaining facility needs to be noti?ed immediately. Before conducting the actual transfer of the prisoner(s), the losing unit or SJA representative will contact the gaining ACC facility and provide the escorts information as well as their travel itinerary. SJA wiil provide the escorts with the checklist and ail required documents to be hand carried to the gaining facility. it is highly encouraged that unit commanders contact the installation PMO for escorting instructions/assistance for high risk/special management prisoners. 5. ACC Points of contact be Mike Chvojka, Encl .J. ST EBEL Confinement Procedures Checklist Operations Division Chief Army Corrections Command 00006 CONFINEMENT PROCEDURES CHECKLIST DD Form 2704 (MAR 2013) WW DD Form (MAR 2013) Result of Triai DD Form 2707 (MAR 2013) Confinement Order on Form 453 (MAY 2090) Charge Sheet initiate Report of Investigation (CID Report) ONLY 1 no nor FAX) ERBIORB ?if Pre-ETrial Agreement (if any) Age of prisoner mg? Is the prisoner currently in pretrial confinement, if so where? Gender: Fm Any previous disciplinary actions? Were alcoho! or drugs a contributing factor in this case? Ni Is the prisoner currently under a Doctors? care? (lf so, iist name and phone number of Health Care Provider) NO. Does the prisoner have any current or ongoing medical probierns or require Speciai medical equipment? Are there any mental health problems, suicidal/homicidelihomosexeall assaultive thoughts or tendencies or a history of mental health problems? 31L Does the prisoner have any PTSD related issues? Has the prisoner assaulted or threatened any staff or other prisoners? 3; NW List names of medications prescribed for prisoner and daily dosages if applicable None. List names of medications prescribed for prisoner and daily dosages if applicable None . How many days medication supply will prisoner have on hand upon arrival? we Is the prisoner an escape risk? (If yes, expiain why) 00007 CONFINEMENT PROCEDURES CHECKLIST CONT. Was DNA sample collected? {If yes, include test kit is there any additional information that should be known about this prisoner? (If 50, list it here) Any additionai remaiks, comments. or concerns: Prisoner confined at JRCF, Ft Leavenworth, KS durinq Pre?Trial. Requested move date: 2 2 August 2 1 3 Prisoner's UIC: Wt)va Primary SJA POC: SJA POC ible name I numberi?Commercial or DSN Phone numb-arms? SJA PDC lam a signature Unit 156's legible name enfCornmereial or USN 1 5 email EUGFESS Corn Commander Ia this name ilmianl ismmander?s inane numberiCdmmai-ciat or USN 00008 1. DATE OF TRIAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REPORT OF RESULT OF TRIAL 20130603 TD: {Cumming Anthony) Commander, Headquarters, United States 15111111.r Military District of Washington, Fort Lesley J. MCNair, Washington DC 20319 1. NOTIFICATION UNDER R.C.M. 1101 IS HEREBY GIVEN IN THE CASE OF THE UNITED STATES VERSUS: a. NAME (Last, Fm, Mijdb BRANCH OF SERVICE c. RANKIORADE 11- Dun (Last 4) Manning, Bradley E. Army 3 a. ORGANIZATION add-ass) 3i OF one} JUDGEALONE ALONE h. CONVENED HY: COURT MARTIAL ORDER a. ISSUINO COMMAND d. DATE I 201 10202 3. OF OFFENSES, PLEAS AND FINDINGS a. CHARCEI h. d. e. f. SPECIFICATION UCMJ CODE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF OFFENSE PLEA FINDING SEE CONTINUATION SHEET La. DATE h. DATE OF ANY FORFEITURES OR REDUCTIONS 20130321 20130903 6. SENTENCE To forfeit ail pay and allowances; to he redueed to Private, to be con?ned for 35 years; and to be IiishonorI'IIJIJ.r discharged from the Service. Ea. CONTENTS OF PRE-TRIAL AGREEMENT CONCERNING SENTENCE TO CONFINEMENT (If 3ij None. h. DAYS OF PRE-TRIAL CREDIT C. DAYS OF OTHER JUDGE ORDERED CREDIT TOTAL PRESENTENCE CREDIT TOWARD POST-TRIAL 1131 112 CDNFINEHENT 1293 1. DNA PROCESSING: IAIN 10 U.S.C. 51566 IS IS NOT REQUIRED. E. OFFENDER REGISTRAHON: 42 U.S.C. i140? IS IS NOT REQUIRED. El. COMPANION ACCUSEDICO-ACCUSED {Namafs} and Soda: Sasumjr Numberfs) {Ifan?} None. 1o. DISTRIBUTION {Copy pmuead IO Cdr, HHC, SJA, HQ, Con?nement FSCility aocuserl', Defense Counsel 11. SIGNED BY {Kane} I I TRIAL COUNSEL I SUMMARY OFFICER a. NAME (Last, First. A?db may} h. c. BRANCH OF SERVICE Fein, Ashden (NMI) ?1 Army at. SIGNATURE e. 20130321 FORM 2707-1, MAR 2013 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE. Adobe PmIassIonaIx 00009 INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING DD FORM 2707-1, OF DEFENSE REPORT OF RESULT OF Date of Trial: Enter date (and all other dates) as 4 digit year, 2 digit month and 2 digit day, no separators. To: Address to the Convening Authority (CA). Include at least two elements of CA unit, geographical location and ZIP code. . United States versus: . Name. Enter the accused name (Last, First, Middle Initial). . Branch of Service (Army, Navy, Air Force, etc.). Rank/Grade (E-6, etc.). . ID number or Social Security Number (Last4 only). . Organization. Accused full unit address. Include at least two elements of the accused unit, geographical location and ZIP code. maps-ma 2. Type of Court Martial. a. Enter an in the appropriate box. b. - d. Convened by: Convening Order number(s), issuing command, and date(s) of the Court Martial Order Number(s), or, if the trial is by SCM, note on form as appropriate and enter the date of detail of the SCM from the referral on PartV, DD Form 458. . Summary of Offenses, Pleas, and Findings. . Charge Number(s) and Specification(s), if any. . UCMJ Article(s). Article number list from the Uniform Code of Military Justice (example: ART 121). . DIBRS Code. Offense severity scale, reference 1325.7 for code listing (example: ART 121-A1). . Brief Description of Offense (example: Larceny). . f. Pleas/Findings. Respective pleas and findings or other disposition. (DQ000303 4.a. Date Adjudged. Date of court-martial. b. Date of Forfeitures or Reductions. Any forfeiture of pay or allowances or reduction in grade that is included in a sentence ofa CM takes effect on the earlier of: (1) the date that is 14 days after date on which the sentence is adjudged; or (2) the date on which the sentence is approved by the convening authority. 5. Sentence. Enter the sentence of the court-martial. If trial resulted in an acquittal, enter Admin/Judicial Credit/Pre-Trial Agreement. Enterthe content of pre-trial agreement concerning sentence, if any. If none, enter "None". Enterthe number of days the accused was in pre-trial (pre?sentence confinement). If none, enter c. Enter the number of days ofjudge ordered administrative credit for illegal pre-trial (pre-sentence) confinement restriction found tantamount to confinement, if any. If none, enter d. Enter the total number of days of pre-trial and judge ordered credit (pre-sentence) confinement credit towards post-trial confinement, if any. If none, enter 7. DNA Processing. In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1565, DNA samples are required on each person subject to UCMJ who is or has been convicted of a "Qualifying Military Offense" (QMO). A QMO is any offense under UCMJ punishable by a sentence to confinement for more than one year. regardless of the sentence imposed. The Service is authorized to collect DNA samples at any time after a general or special court?martial sentence is adjudged for one or more It is the Court?Martial Convening Authority (CMCA) action under Article 60 that determines whetherthe result of trial concludes with a QMO conviction. NOTE: DNA sample does not apply to the finding of SCM or proceeding under Article 15, UCMJ. 8. Sex Offender Registration. In accordance with 42 U.S.C. 14071: a person convicted of any of the offenses punishable under the UCMJ (reference 1325.7 for listing). NOTE: A "Qualifying Military Offense" is a felony or sexual offense determined by the Secretary of Defense to be a QMO for the purpose of 10 U.S.C. 9. Companion Accused/Co-Accused. Enter the name(s) and Social Security Number(s) (last 4 digits only) of companion or co-accused, if any. If none, enter 10. Distribution. Enter a list of copies furnished to named agencies or units (example: Finance, Company, etc.). NOTE: Make sufficient copies after the form is signed by the trial counsel or SCM Officer. Forward the original to the convening authority. 11. Signed By. Enter an in the box to indicate whether Trial Counsel or Summary Court-Martial Officer. a. e. Enter the full name, rank/grade and branch of service of the trial counsel orthe summary court-martial officer. NOTE: You should ensure that a copy of the Department of Defense Result of Trial is expeditiously provided to the Finance and Accounting Office (FAO) in any case involving a reduction in rank or forfeiture of pay or fine. DD FORM 2707~1 (BACK), MAR 2013 00010 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707?1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Comany, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer? Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 Section IV Continued: a. . C.DIBRS . . f. ARTICLES) C.DE (LBRIEI DESCRIPTION .1 OIIENSE e. PLEA FINDINGS In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about I/The 104 1 November 2009 and on or about NG NG 27 May 2010, without proper authority, knowingly give intelligence to the enemy, through indirect means. In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 1 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010, wrongfully and wantonly cause to be published on the intemet intelligence belonging to the United States government, having knowledge that intelligence published on the intemet is accessible to the enemy, such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 15 February 2010 and on or about 5 April 2010, having unauthorized possession of information relating GM to the national defense, to wit: a video ?le named "12 JUL 07 CZ ENGAGEMENT ZONE 30 GC Anyoneavi", with reason to believe such infonnation could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, 1 11/1 134 NG 11/2 134 134-Y1 00011 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707?1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E, US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Annyr Garrison, Joint Base Myer- Henderson Hall. Fort Myer, VA 22211 willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 793(e), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and figures ?15 February 2010? and ?5 April 2010?, substituting therefor the words and figures ?14 February 2010? and ?21 February 2010?; further excepting the words ?information relating to the national defense, to wit:?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted,?, substituting therefor the words ?did willfully communicate?; further excepting the words and ?gures, ?in violation of 18 US. Code Section Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and ?gures. In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station 11/3 134 134-Y1 Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 22 March 2010 and on or about 26 March 2010, having unauthorized possession of information relating 2 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707?1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, Eu 00012 US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myerw Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 to the national defense, to wit: more than one classi?ed memorandum produced by a United States government intelligence agency, with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, in violation of 18 US, Code Section 793(e), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and ?gures ?22 March 2010? and ?26 March 2010?, substituting therefor the words and ?gures ?17 March 2010? and ?22 March 2010?; further excepting the words ?information relating to the national defense, to wit?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted,?, substituting therefor the words ?did willfully communicate?; further excepting the words and ?gures ?in violation of 18 US. Code Section Not Guilty, but Guilty of the 3 00013 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707?1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, U.S. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer? Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 excepted the words and figures "22 March 2010", substituting therefor the words and figures "17 March 2010". 11/4 134 134-Y1 In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 31 December 2009 and on or about 5 January 2010, steal, purloin, or knowingly convert another, a record or thing of value of the United States or of a department or agency thereof, to wit: the Combined Information Data Network Exchange Iraq database containing more than 380,000 records belonging to the United States government, of a value of more than $1,000, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 641, such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. NG After pleas but before ?ndings, the Military Judge granted an opposed motion by the Government to amend the Speci?cation, excepting the words ?to wit:? and substituting therefor the words ?to wit: a portion of?. 134 134-Y1 In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 31 December 2009 and on or about 9 February 2010, having unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense, to wit: more than twenty 4 00014 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707?1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E., US. Army, Headguarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer? Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 classi?ed records from the Combined Information Data Network Exchange Iraq database, with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 793(e), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. After arraignment but before pleas, the Military Judge granted an unopposed motion by the Government to amend the Speci?cation, adding the words ?and at or near Rockville, Maryland,? after ?Iraq,?. Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and ?gures ?31 December 2009? and ?9 February 2010?, substituting therefor the words and ?gures ?5 January 2010? and ?3 February 2010?; further excepting the words ?information relating to the national defense, to wit:?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or 5 00015 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E., US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 transmitted,?, substituting therefor the words, ?did willfully communicate?; further excepting the words and ?gures ?in violation of 18 US. Code Section In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 31 December 2009 and on or about 8 January 2010, steal, purloin, or knowingly convert another, a record or thing of value of the United States or of a department or agency thereof, to wit: the Combined Information 11/6 134 l34-Y1 Data Network Exchange NG Afghanistan database containing more than 90,000 records belonging to the United States government, of a value of more than $1,000, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 641, such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. After pleas but before ?ndings, the Military Judge granted an opposed motion by the Government to amend the Speci?cation, excepting the words ?to wit:? and substituting therefor the words ?to wit: a portion of?. In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 31 December 2009 and on or about 9 February 2010, having unauthorized possession of information relating to the national 6 11/7 134 134-Y1 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E., US. Army, Headguarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 00016 !ase Cl" defense, to wit: more than twenty classi?ed records from the Combined Information Data Network Exchange Afghanistan database, with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 793(e), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. After arraignment but before pleas, the Military Judge granted an unopposed motion by the Government to amend the Speci?cation, adding the words ?and at or near Rockville, Maryland,? after ?Iraq,?. Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and ?gures ?31 December 2009? and ?9 February 2010?, substituting the words and ?gures ?5 January 2010? and ?3 February 2010?; further excepting the words ?information relating to the national defense, to wit:?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, 7 00017 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E., U.S. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Garrison, Joint Base lVIverw Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 delivered, or transmitted,?, substituting therefor the words ?did willfully communicate?; further excepting the words and ?gures ?in violation of 18 U.S. Code 11/8 134 134-Yl In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, on or about 8 March 2010, steal, purloin, 0r lmowingly convert another, a record or thing of value of the United States 0r of a department or agency thereof, to wit: a United States Southern Command database containing more than 700 records belonging to the United States government, of a value of more than $1,000, in violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 641, such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. NG 11/9 134 l34-Yl In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, U.S. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station .Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 8 March 2010 and on or about 27 May 2010, having unauthorized possession of infonnation relating to the national defense, to wit: more than three classi?ed records from a United States Southern Command database, with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or 8 00018 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707?1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint ase ver- Henderson. Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 cause to be communicated, delivered, or tansmitted, the said infonnation, to a person not entitled to receive it, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 793(e), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Not Guilty, but Guilty 0fthe excepted words and ?gures ?between on or about 8 March 2010 and on or about 27 May 2010?, substituting therefor the words and figures ?on or about 8 March 2010?; further excepting the words ?information relating to the national defense, to wit:?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted,?, substituting therefor the words ?did willfully communicate?; further excepting the words and ?gures ?in violation of 18 US. Code 134 In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 11 April 2010 and on or about 27 May 2010, having unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense, to wit: more than ?ve classi?ed records relating to a military operation in Farah Province, Afghanistan 9 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E., US. Army, Headguarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison. Joint Base Myer; Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 00019 occurring on or about 4 May 2009, with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 793(e), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and ?gures ?11 April 2010? and ?27 May 2010?, substituting therefor the words and ?gures ?10 April 2010? and ?12 April 2010?; further excepting the words ?information relating to the national defense, to wit:?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted,?, substituting therefor the words ?did willfully communicate?; further excepting the words and ?gures ?in violation of 18 US. Code Section 134 In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about NG NG 10 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E. 00020 US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Garrison, Joint !ase aver- Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 1 November 2009 and on or about 8 January 2010, having unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense, to wit: a ?le named PAX.zip" containing a video named PAX.wmv", with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 793(6), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. 134 134-Y1 In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 28 March 2010 and on or about 4 May 2010, steal, purloin, or knowingly convert another, a record or thing of value of the United States or of a department or agency thereof, to wit: the Department of State Net- Centric Diplomacy database containing more than 250,000 records belonging to the United States government, of a value of more than $1,000, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 641, such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. NG 11 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E., US. ArmL Headguarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer? Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 00021 11/13 134 134-Y1 In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 28 March 2010 and on or about 27 May 2010, having knowingly exceeded authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network computer, and by means of such conduct having obtained information that has been determined by the United States government pursuant to an Executive Order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations, to wit: more than seventy??ve classi?ed United States Department of State cables, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, with reason to believe that such information so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 103 such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and figures ?27 May 2010?, substituting therefor the words and ?gures ?4 May 2010?; further excepting the words ?knowingly exceeded authorized access?, substituting therefor the 12 00022 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707?1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E., US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Mver- Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 words ?knowingly accessed?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe that such infonnation so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, in violation of 18 US. Code Section In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 15 February 2010 and on or about 18 February 2010, having knowingly exceeded authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network computer, and by means of such conduct having obtained information that has been determined by the United States government pursuant to an Executive Order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations, to wit: a classi?ed Department of State cable titled ?Reykjavik-13?, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, with reason to believe that such information so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 103 such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the almed 13 11/14 134 134-Y1 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707?1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E. 00023 US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison. Joint Base Myer- Henderson Hall, Fort Myer. VA 22211 forces. Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and ?gures ?15 February 2010? and ?18 February 2010?, substituting therefor the words and figures ?14 February 2010? and ?15 February 2010?; further excepting the words ?knowingly exceeded authorized access?, substituting therefor the words ?knowingly accessed?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe that such information so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, in violation of 18 US. Code Section Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and figures. 134 In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 15 February 2010 and on or about 15 March 2010, having unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense, to wit: a classified record produced by a United States Army intelligence organization, dated 18 March 2008, with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, the said information, to a person not entitled to receive it, in 6* 14 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 00024 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint ase ver- Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 violation of 18 US. Code Section 793(e), such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Not Guilty, but Guilty to the excepted words and figures ?between on or about 15 February 2010 and on or about 15 March 2010?, substituting therefor the words and figures ?on or about 8 March 2010?; further excepting the words ?information relating to the national defense, to wit:?; further excepting the words ?with reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted,?, substituting therefor the words ?did willfully communicate?; further excepting the words and ?gures ?in violation of 18 US. Code Section 11/16 134 134-Y1 In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 11 May 2010 and on or about 27 May 2010, steal, purloin, or knowingly convert another, a record or thing of value of the United States or of a department or agency thereof, to wit: the United States Forces Iraq Microsoft Outlook I SharePoint Exchange Server global address list 15 00025 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, E., US. Army, Headqualters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer? Henderson Hall, Fort Mver, VA 22211 belonging to the United States government, of a value of more than $1,000, in violation of 18 US. Code Section 641, such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. After pleas but before ?ndings, the Military Judge granted an opposed motion by the Government to amend the Speci?cation, excepting the words ?to wit:? and substituting therefor the words ?to wit: a portion of?. In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 1 November 2009 and on or about 8 March 2010, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph Army Regulation 25-2, dated 24 October 2007, by attempting to bypass network or information system security mechanisms. In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 1 1 February 2010 and on or about 3 April 2010, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 4- Army Regulation 25-2, dated 24 October 2007, by adding unauthorized software to a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network computer. In that Private First Class Bradley 92 092-A0 E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or NG near Contingency Operating Station 16 92 092-A0 NG 92 092-A0 NG 00026 CONTINUATION SHEET, DD Form 2707-1 PFC MANNING, BRADLEY, US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer- Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211 Hammer, Iraq, on or about 4 May 2010, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 4- Army Regulation 25?2, dated 24 October 2007, by adding unauthorized software to a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network computer. In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 1 1 May 2010 and on or about 27 92 May 2010, violate a lawful general NG regulation, to wit: paragraph 4- Army Regulation 25?2, dated 24 October 2007, by using an information system in a manner other than its intended purpose. In that Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, US. Army, did, at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, on divers occasions between on or? about 1 November 92 092-A0 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 7-4, Army Regulation 380-5, dated 29 September 2000, by wrongfully storing classi?ed information. Not Guilty, but Guilty to the excepted words and ?gures, ?1 November 2009?, substituting therefor the words and ?gures ?8 January 2010?. Not Guilty, but Guilty of the excepted words and ?gures. 17 00027 ORDER 1. PERSON TO BE CONFINED 2. DATE 8. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) RITY NUMBER Manning, Bradley E. 2013082] c. BRANCH d. GRADE 9 (Parent unit) Army HHC. USAG, JBM-HH, Ft. Myer, VA 2221] 3. TYPE OF CONFINEMENT a PRE-TRIAL b. RESULT OF NJP c. RESULT OF COURT MARTIAL: [Em I:Ives Em EYES mm EYES d. TYPE OF COURT MARTIAL: SCM I SPCM [l GCM El VACATED SUSPENSION 4. OF UCMJ ARTICLES VIOLATED (List all cheryels) r?l prisoner ls pro-trial. List guilty ?nding(s) only if prisoner is postotn'al.) Article 134 Article 134 - 18 USC 793(8) Article 134 - 18 USC 64] Article 134 18 USC 1030(a)(l) and Article 92 (x5) 5. SENTENCE ADJUDGED (Annotate sentence from the result of trial) ADJUDGED DATE TO fOIfeit all pay and allowances, to he reduced to Private, l, to be confined for 35 years, and to be dishonorably discharged from the Service. 20130821 6. IF THE SENTENCE IS DEFERRED, THE DATE DEFERMENT IS TERMINATED: 7. PERSON DIRECTING CONFINEMENT NAME (Last, Middle Initial). GRADE AND TITLE h. IGNATURE c. DATE d. TIME . 1; von Ellen. Alexander, 03. Thai Counsel 20130821 Tr'bL} 8. LEGAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL REQUIRED (Review required by different name at 7 a and b. a. DNA PROCESSING IS IS NOT REQUIRED UNDER 10 USC. 1555. COLLECTED: YES P: NO Io, SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION IS IS NOT REQUIRED UNDER 42 USC. 14071 TYPED NAME (Last. First, Middle Initial). GRADE AND TITLE a e. DATE I Fem, Ashden (NMI). 0-4, Trial Counsel r- A- 20,3082, 9. MEDICAL CERTIFICATE (Required completion only when applicable by Servrce regurarlon) e. The above named prisoner was examined by me at on 90/5"va and found to be . lor con?nement I certify that from this examination the execution of the foregoing sentence to con?nement will will not produce serious Injury to the prisoner?s health. -- - b. The following lrregularities were noted during the examination (List only non-medleallnformetlon. Refer to SF 600 for all medical infonnetion, lncludlng Hlv, TB and pregnancy tests and results.) 10. EXAMINER a. TYPED TITLE I b. SIGNATURE c. DATE d. TIME Mo, FHA Colonel, US. Army Medical Corps I 30,33 0- d' a; 002 a 11. RECEIPT FOR PRISONER (Completed by the correctlonal lacll a. THE PRISONER NAMED ABOVE HAS BEEN RECEIVED FOR CONFINEMENT AT (Facility Name and Location) AND TIME- (Time) I). PERSON RECEIPTING FOR PRISONER (Typed c. SIGNATURE d. DATE e. TIME name (Last, First. Grade and Title) DD FORM 2707, MAR 2013 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE Adobe Prolessiunal 00028 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive DATE: 21 AUG 2013 FROM: SAC CCIU WASHINGTON METRO RA QUANTICO TO: CHIEF OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE MDW FT MCNAIR DC SUBIECT: CID REPORT OF INVESTIGATION 10TH - 0028? 5Y2P2 8P5 8P3 9G1 9G2F DRAFTER: RELEASER: 1. OF OCCURRENCES: 1. 01 NOV 2009, 0001 24 MAY 2010, 2300; VARIOUS LOCATIONS, FORWARD OPERATING BASE (FOB) HAMMER, IRAQ, AE 09308 2. REPORTED: 10 JUN 2010, 1247 3. IN 1 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 00029 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 4. SUBJECT: 1. MANNING, BRADLEY HEADQUARTERS AND HEADQ ANY (HHC), 2ND BRIGADE COMBAT TEAM (BCT), 10TH MOUNTAIN DIVISION, FORWARD OPERATING BASE (FOB) HAMMER, IRAQ, ARMED FORCES AFRICA, CANADA, EUROPE MIDDLE EAST 09308; CT (ARTICLE 106A, A US. GOVERNMENT COMPUTER WITHOUT, OR IN EXCESS OF, AUTHORIZATION (18 USC TO A US. GOVERNMENT COMPUTER (18 USC 5. VICTIM: 1. US. (ARTICLE 106A, A US. GOVERNMENT COMPUTER WITHOUT, OR IN EXCESS OF, AUTHORIZATION (18 USC TO A US. GOVERNMENT COMPUTER (18 USC 6. INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY: THE INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT IS BASED UPON AN ALLEGATION OR PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION AND MAY BE CHANGED PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THE INVESTIGATION. 10TH STATUS: THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATE. ON 21 AUG 13 JUDGE LIND SENTENCED PFC MANNING TO 35 YEARS CONFINEMENT, REDUCTION IN GRADE TO E?l, FORFEITURE OF ALL PAY AND ALLOWANCES, AND DISHONORABLE DISCHARGE. PENDING FINAL REVIEW BY THE COURT MARTIAL CONVENING AUTHORITY, 2 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 00030 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive REMAINING SUPPORT TO THE PROSECUTION TEAM AND PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL REPORT OF INVESTIGATION. 9TH STATUS: THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATE. ON 3 JUN 13, GENERAL COURT MARTIAL PROCEEDINGS BEGAN AGAINST PFC MANNING CULMINATING IN THE VERDICT ISSUED ON 30 JUL 13 BY COL DENISE R. LIND, CHIEF JUDGE, US. ARMY IST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT. COL LIND FOUND PFC MANNING NOT GUILTY OF AIDING THE ENEMY, AND ONE OTHER SPECIFICATION OF RELEASING INFORMATION. COL LIND FOUND PFC MANNING GUILTY OF 20 OTHER SPECIFICATIONS RELATED TO THE THEFT AND RELEASE OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF INTELLIGENCE DOCUMENTS. THE SENTENCING HEARING WAS SCHEDULED TO COMMENCE ON 31 JUL 13 AND WAS EXPECTED TO LAST UNTIL MID AUGUST. BASED ON THE VERDICT, PFC MANNING FACES A MAXIMUM SENTENCE OF 136 YEARS. PENDING FINAL SENTENCING OF PFC MANNING AND PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL REPORT OF INVESTIGATION. 8TH STATUS: THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATE. ON 26 AUG 11, WIKILEAKS BEGAN THE RELEASE OF APPROXIMATELY 122,000 ADDITIONAL DEPARTMENT OF STATE (DOS) CABLES ONTO THE INTERNET, WHICH INCLUDED THE UNREDACTED NAMES OF INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD SPOKEN TO AMERICAN DIPLOMATS WITH AN EXPECTATION OF CONFIDENTIALITY. IN SOME CASES, THE CABLES WERE MARKED WITH THE WARNING IN REGARDS TO THE IDENTITIES. FURTHER, DER FREITAG, A GERMAN PUBLICATION, REPORTED THAT AN FILE CONTAINING ALL OF THE 251,287 DIPLOMATIC CABLES CLAIMED TO BE IN THE POSSESSION OF WIKILEAKS WAS INADVERTENTLY POSTED BY WIKILEAKS MONTHS AGO. ADDITIONALLY, THEY REPORTED THE PAS SWORD TO THAT FILE WAS RECENTLY MADE AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET VIA AN UNINTENTIONAL DISCLOSURE BY AN OF WIKILEAKS (NFI). THE CABLES IN THIS FILE WERE REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN UNREDACTED, THEREBY EXPOSING DIPLOMATIC SOURCES TO POSSIBLE REPRISAL. TO DATE, CCIU HAS VERIFIED THAT WIKILEAKS POSTED APPROXIMATELY 122,000 UNREDACTED DOCUMENTS THAT APPEAR TO BE LEGITIMATE DOS CABLES, 3 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 00031 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive CLASSIFIED AND UNCLASSIFIED. THE 122,000 CABLES HAVE BEEN COLLECTED AS EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS IS ONGOING. INVESTIGATION CONTINUES BY CID, FBI, AND DSS. 7TH STATUS: THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATE. ON 24 APR 11, WIKILEAKS POSTED ON THEIR WEBSITE APPROXIMATELY 779 SENSITIVE DOCUMENTS RELATED TO DETAINEES HOUSED AT U.S. NAVAL STATION GUANTANAMO BAY, MANY OF WHICH WERE CLASSIFIED. THE RELEASE WAS COORDINATED WITH THE NEW YORK TIMES, WASHINGTON POST, EL PAIS (A SPANISH NEWSPAPER) AND OTHER NEWS MEDIA EACH OF WHICH PUBLISHED SEPARATE ARTICLES ON THEIR WEB SITES. CCIU ANALYSIS INDICATES THE DOCUMENTS ORIGINATED FROM WEB SERVERS HOSTING THE INTELINK RELATED WEBSITE INTELLIPEDIA, WHICH IS ACCESSIBLE ON THE SIPRNET. FURTHER, CCIU PRELIMINARY FORENSIC EXAMINATIONS FOUND REMNANTS OF DETAINEE DOCUMENTS RELATED TO GUANTANAMO BAY ON BOTH PFC SIPRNET AND PERSONALLY OWNED COMPUTERS, AND HAVE IDENTIFIED LOG FILES SHOWING WHEN THESE DOCUMENTS WERE ALLEGEDLY ACCESSED BY PFC MANNING. FORENSIC ANALYSIS CONTINUES. ON 20 APR 11, PFC MANNING WAS TRANSFERRED FROM THE MARINE CORPS BASE BRIG, QUANTICO, VA TO THE MIDWEST JOINT REGIONAL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, FORT LEAVENWORTH, KS, PENDING AN ARTICLE 32 HEARING. MARTIAL JURISDICTION FOR PFC MANNING REMAINS WITH THE COMMANDING GENERAL, MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON. INVESTIGATION CONTINUES BY CID, FBI, AND DSS. 6TH STATUS: THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATE. ON 28 NOV 10, WIKILEAKS POSTED ON THEIR WEBSITE APPROXIMATELY 243 SENSITIVE STATE DEPARTMENT CABLES, MANY OF WHICH WERE CLASSIFIED. WIKILEAKS INDICATED IT WAS IN POSSESSION OF 251,287 STATE DEPARTMENT CABLES AND WOULD RELEASE THE REMAINDER OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. WIKILEAKS COORDINATED THIS RELEASE WITH DER SPIEGEL (A GERMAN NEWS MAGAZINE), THE GUARDIAN (A UK. NEWSPAPER), LE MONDE (A FRENCH NEWSPAPER), AND OTHER MEDIA OUTLETS, EACH OF WHICH PUBLISHED 4 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 00032 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sansitive ARTICLES ON THEIR WEBSITES CCIU ANALYSIS INDICATES THE DOCUMENTS ORIGINATED FROM A CLASSIFIED STATE DEPARTMENT DATABASE LOCATED ON THE SIPRNET. FURTHER, CCIU PRELIMINARY FORENSIC EXAMINATIONS FOUND OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT CABLES ON BOTH PFC SIPRNET AND PERSONALLY OWNED COMPUTERS. FORENSIC ANALYSIS CONTINUES. THE LOSS OR COMPROMISE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND THE LOSS OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFIAELE INFORMATION (PII) IS BEING ASSESSED. THE ESTIMATED COST OF DAMAGE IS PENDING. THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL OFFENSES AND SUBJECTS IS BEING EVALUATED. INVESTIGATION CONTINUES BY CID, FBI, AND DSS. 5TH STATUS: THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATE ON 22 OCT 10, WIKILEAKS POSTED ON THEIR WEBSITE APPROXIMATELY 391,832 CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE WAR IN IRAQ. THE RELEASE WAS COORDINATED WITH THE NEW YORK TIMES, DER SPIEGEL (A GERMAN NEWS MAGAZINE), THE GUARDIAN (A UK. NEWSPAPER), AND AL IAZEERA (AN ARABIC LANGUAGE NEWS NETWORK), EACH OF WHICH PUBLISHED SEPARATE ARTICLES ON THEIR WEB SITES. CCIU ANALYSIS INDICATES THE DOCUMENTS ORIGINATED FROM ONE OF THE COMBINED INFORMATION DATA EXCHANGE (CIDNE) SERVERS LOCATED ON THE FURTHER, CCIU PRELIMINARY FORENSIC EXAMINATIONS FOUND REMNANTS OF CIDNE DOCUMENTS RELATING TO IRAQ ON BOTH PFC SIPRNET AND PERSONALLY OWNED COMPUTERS. FORENSIC ANALYSIS CONTINUES. THE LOSS OR COMPROMISE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND THE LOSS OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFOIUVIATION (PII) IS BEING ASSESSED. THE ESTIMATED COST OF DAMAGE IS PENDING, THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL OFFENSES AND SUBJECTS IS BEING EVALUATED. INVESTIGATION CONTINUES BY FBL AND DSS. 4TH STATUS: THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATEAUG 10,, WIKILEAKS POSTED CLASSIFIED PORTABLE 5 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 00033 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive DOCUMENT FORMAT (PDF) DOCUMENTS CONTAINING U.S. GOVERNMENT REPORTING. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS BY ANOTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCY DISCLOSED PFC INTELINK ACCOUNT WAS THE ONLY ACCOUNT USED TO VIEW AND OBTAIN THE PDF VERSION OF THESE DOCUMENTS PRIOR TO THEIR RELEASE BY WIKILEAKS. INITIAL FINDINGS INDICATE PFC SIPRNET ACCOUNT ACCESSED APPROXIMATELY 20 OTHER CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCY. COLLECTION OF THE RELEVANT LOGS AND OTHER FORENSIC ANALYSIS IS PENDING. THE LOSS OR COMPROMISE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND THE LOSS OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION (PII) IS BEING ASSESSED. THE ESTIMATED COST OF DAMAGE IS PENDING. THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL OFFENSES AND SUBJECTS IS BEING EVALUATED. INVESTIGATION CONTINUES BY CID, FBI, AND DSS. 3D STATUS: THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATE. ON OR ABOUT 30 JUL 10, WIKILEAKS POSTED AN FILE NAMED WHICH IS SUSPECTED TO CONTAIN ADDITIONAL CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS. THE NATURE AND CONTENTS OF THE FILE ARE UNKNOWN. THE FILE WAS DOWNLOADED AND COLLECTED AS EVIDENCE AND EFFORTS ARE ONGOING. ON 3 AUG 10, THE FBI ASSUMED THE LEAD AGENCY ROLE FOR MATTERS INVOLVING POTENTIAL CIVILIAN SUSPECTS. THIS IS A JOINT INVESTIGATION BY CID, DSS, AND THE FBI, WITH FBI AS THE LEAD INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY FOR ALL CIVILIAN RELATED LEADS. CID REMAINS THE LEAD INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY FOR ALL US. ARMY LEADS AND MATTERS INVOLVING PFC MANNING. DSS WILL PURSUE ALL LEADS INVOLVING THE DOS. INVESTIGATION CONTINUES BY CID, FBI, AND DSS. 2D STATUS: 6 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 00034 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive THIS STATUS REPORT WAS GENERATED TO ADD THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (FBI) AS A JOINT PARTNER IN THIS INVESTIGATION AND PROVIDE AN INVESTIGATIVE UPDATE. ON 25 JUL 10, PUBLISHED ON THEIR WEBSITE APPROXIMATELY 77,000 CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN. THE RELEASE WAS COORDINATED WITH THE NEW YORK TIMES, DER SPIEGEL (A GERMAN NEWS MAGAZINE), AND THE GUARDIAN (A UK. NEWSPAPER), EACH OF WHICH PUBLISHED SEPARATE ARTICLES ON THEIR WEB SITES. CCIU ANALYSIS INDICATES THE DOCUMENTS ORIGINATED FROM ONE OF THE COMBINED INFORMATION DATA EXCHANGE (CIDNE) SERVERS LOCATED ON THE SIPRNET. FURTHER, CCIU FORENSIC EXAMINATIONS FOUND REMNANTS OF CIDNE DOCUMENTS RELATING TO IRAQ ON BOTH PFC SIPRNET AND PERSONALLY OWNED COMPUTERS. FORENSIC ANALYSIS CONTINUES. ON 29 JUL 10, THIS OFFICE WAS NOTIFIED THAT JURISDICTION FOR PFC MANNING WAS TRANSFERRED FROM THE COMMANDING GENERAL, U.S. DIVISION - CENTER, TO THE COMMANDING GENERAL, MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON. PFC MANNING WAS TRANSFERRED FROM THE THEATER FIELD CONFINEMENT FACILITY, KUWAIT TO THE MARINE CORPS BASE BRIG, QUANTICO, VA. ON 30 JUL 10, THE WASHINGTON FIELD OFFICE, FBI, AGREED TO PARTICIPATE OINTLY IN THIS INVESTIGATION. THIS IS A JOINT INVESTIGATION BY CID, DSS, AND THE FBI, WITH CID AS THE LEAD INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY. CID HAS PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR COORDINATING ALL LEADS AFFECTING THE US. ARMY, AND DSS HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR LEADS INVOLVING THE DOS. THE FBI IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING COUNTERESPIONAGE EXPERTISE AND INVESTIGATIVE SUPPORT. THE INVESTIGATION CONTINUES BY CID, DSS, AND FBI. INITIAL: ON 10 JUN 10, CID REPORT OF INVESTIGATION (ROI) WAS CONTROL TRANSFERRED TO THIS OFFICE. THIS IS A CATEGORY I MONITORED ROI. ON 25 MAY 10, A CID SOURCE OF INFORMATION REPORTED THAT A SOLDIER STATIONED IN IRAQ CLAIMED IN ONLINE CHAT SESSIONS THAT HE HAD 7 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 00035 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enfercement Sensitive DISCLOSED CLASSIFIED US. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION TO THE OF WHICH THE SUBSEQUENTLY POSTED ON THE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE WEB SITE. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REVEALED PFC MANNING, WHILE STATIONED AT FORWARD OPERATING BASE (FOB) ENGAGED IN ONLINE CHAT SESSIONS IN WHICH HE DISCLOSED THAT HE HAD GAINED ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED US. GOVERNMENT COMPUTER SYSTEMS TO OBTAIN CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. PFC MANNING SPECIFICALLY CLAIMED HE HAD OBTAINED TWO CLASSIFIED US. AMY VIDEOS AND APPROXIMATELY 260,000 CLASSIFIED DEPARTMENT OF STATE (DOS) DOCUIVIENTS. HE FURTHER CLAIMED TO HAVE PROVIDED BOTH VIDEOS AND A PORTION OF THE CLASSIFIED DOS INFORMATION TO A FOREIGN NATIONAL ASSOCIATED WITH WHO LATER POSTED SOME OF THE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE WEB SITE. IN THE CHAT SESSIONS, PFC MANNING REVEALED HE INITIALLY DISCLOSED THE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AS A TEST TO DETERMINE IF HE COULD DO SO WITHOUT BEING DETECTED BY AUTHORITIES. HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE DISCLOSURES WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT U.S. FOREIGN RELATIONS. ON 27 MAY 10, PFC MANNING WAS APPREIIENDED BY CID. PFC MANNING INVOKED HIS RIGHT TO LEGAL COUNSEL AND DECLINED TO MAKE ANY STATEMENTS. A MILITARY SEARCH AUTHORIZATION WAS EXECUTED ON PFC WORK. AND LIVING AREAS, RESULTING IN THE SEIZURE OF VARIOUS ITEMS OF DIGITAL EVIDENCE. PRELIMINARY FORENSIC EXAMINATIONS REVEALED PFC MANNING EXCEEDED HIS AUTHORIZED ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED US. GOVERNMENT COMPUTERS AND DOWNLOADED APPROXIMATELY 10,000 CLASSIFIED AND UNCLASSIFIED DOS DOCUMENTS AND AT LEAST ONE CLASSIFIED US. ARMY VIDEO. TO DATE, NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FOUND THAT WOULD SIBSTANTIATE PFC CLAIM OF DOWNLOADING 260,000 DOS DOCUMENTS. FORENSIC ANALYSIS CONTINUES. THE LOSS OR COMPROMISE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND THE LOSS OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION (PII) IS BEING ASSESSED. THE ESTIMATED COST OF DAMAGE IS PENDWG. THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL OFFENSES AND SUBJECTS IS BEING EVALUATED. THIS IS A JOINT INVESTIGATION BY CID AND THE DOS: DIPLOMATIC SECURITY SERVICE (DSS), WITH CID AS THE LEAD INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY. CID HAS PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR COORDINATING ALL LEADS AFFECTING THE US. 8 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Lawr Enforcement Sensitive 00036 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive WLITY FOR LEADS INVOLVING THE DOS. THE- INVESTIGATION CONTINUES BY CID AND DSS. CID REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION ARE SUBJECT TO A QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW BY CID HIGHER HEADQUARTERS. 7. COMMANDERS ARE REMINDED OF THE PROVISIONS OF AR 600-8-2 PERTAINING TO SUSPENSION OF FAVORABLE PERSONNEL ACTIONS AND AR 380?67 FOR THE SUSPENSION OF SECURITY CLEARANCES OF PERSONS UNDER INVESTIGATION. 8. USACIDC REPORTS ARE EXEMPT FROM AUTOMATIC TERMINATION OF PROTECTIVE MARKINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 3, AR 25-65. 9 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Law Enforcement Sensitive 00037 ARTICLE 32 INVESTIGATION -0 UNCLASSIFIED EXHIBIT 55 Encls) INVESTIGATING REPORT I?WChar'ges Under 3.2. and ROM. 405. for Courts-Martial} 1a. {Name afhwejtigarmg ejects?- GRADE c. ORGANIZATION DATE OF REPOR Last, First. MI) Almenza. Paul R. 0-5 Legal Support DetachmenHLSO} I I Ian 20I2 2a. TO: (Name ry'O?Icer who directed the b. TITLE 0. ORGANIZATION Im'mugmmn Lem?. .UD Army ?artisan Coma? Carl Jr. Joint Base MyerJ?Iendersnn Hall. Fort Myer. VA 222] I 33. NAME OF ACCUSED (I'mr. Fir". I). GRADE C. SSN (I. ORGANIZATION 3. DATE OF CHARGES Manning, Bradley E. E-3 HHC. USAG. JB Myer-Hen. Hall 1 March 20] I {Cheek aunt-er) YES NO 4. IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 32. UCMJ. AND ROM. 405. MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL. I HAVE INVESTIGATED THE CHARGES APPENUED HERETO {Exhibit 1) 5. THE ACCUSED WAS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL (If not. see 9 below) B. COUNSEL WHO REPRESENTED THE ACCUSED WAS QUALIFIED UNDER RCM. 405m} 50201] Ta. NAME OF DEFENSE COUNSEL (Lust. First. GRADE 33. NAME OF ASSISTANT DEFENSE COUNSEL {Jami b. GRADE Coombs. David E. CIV Kemkes. Matthew .1. 0-4 c. ORGANIZATION I?Tfapproprimej c. ORGANIZATION US. Army Trial Defense Service. Atlantic Region d. ADDRESS El. ADDRESS (Hepprepnmw I I South Angell St.. Smte 317 229 I'Orresl Circle Providence. RI {12906 Myer. VA 222l Q. ITO be signed by net-used greet-med wan-ea meme! accused does no! IIng'. I'm-estigan'rlg q?iecr epraI'n In deter? In Item 3H 3. PLACE b. DATE I HAVE BEEN INFORMED OF MY RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED IN THIS INVESTIGATION BY COUNSEL. INCLUDING MY RIGHT TO CIVILIAN OR MILITARY COUNSEL OF MY CHOICE IF REASONABLY AVAILABLE. I WAIVE MY RIGHT TO COUNSEL IN THIS INVESTIGATION. I3. SIGNATURE OF ACCUSED 10. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE INVESTIGATION INFORMED THE ACCUSED IIppropI-Iate eerwen NO THE CHARGEIS) UNDER INVESTIGATION THE IDENTITY OF THE ACCUSER THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION UNDER ARTICLE 31 . THE PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGATION THE WITNESSES AND OTHER EVIDENCE KNOWN TO ME WHICH EXPECTED TO PRESENT THE RIGHT TO WITNESSES . THE RIGHT TO HAVE AVAILABLE WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED THE RIGHT TO PRESENT ANYTHING IN DEFENSE. EXTENUATION. OR MITIGATION THE RIGHT TO MAKE A SWORN OR UNSWORN STATEMENT. ORALLY OR IN WRITING a B. THE RIGHT TO BE PRESENT THROUGHOUT THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE f. 9 I. j. 1 Ia. THE ACCUSED AND COUNSEL WERE PRESENT THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE I'I'fn?le accused or cuemef were absent during any part q?he heImr I b. STATE THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND DESCRIBE THE PROCEEDINGS CONDUCTED IN THE ABSENCE OF ACCUSED OR COUNSEL NOTE: If additional space is required for any itemI enter the addltionaf material In Item 21 or on a separate sheet. Identify such material with the proper numerical and. It appropriate, lettered heading II-LI-Imxpte .I Securely attach any additional sheets to the form and add a note In the appropriate item of the form: "See additional sheet." DD Form 45?. AUG 34 EDITION OF OCT as Is OBSOLETE. Adobe Pretesemnal an UNCLASSIFIED WITH IO EXHIBIT 55 Encls) UNCLASSIFIED EXHIBIT 55 EncIs) 123. THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES TESTIFIED UNDER OATH: (Check appropriate answer; NAME (Last. First. MI) GRADE Hfam't ORGANIZATIONIADDRESS (Whichwer is appropriate; YES NO Graham. Toni MP Det Scho?eld Barracks, Roberisun. Caider Computer Crimes Investlgotwe CID. Germany Manda.- Mark Computer Crimes Investigative Unit, CID. VA - Benenmum Troy .S. Treaoury Dopanment tfonnerly ofCompuler Crime:- Investlgauv: . A . Madnd, Bryan H. (REL) ?c m? See continuation sheet I). THE SUBSTANCE OF THE TESTIMONY OF THESE WITNESSES HAS BEEN REDUCED TO WRITING AND IS ATTACHED. 13a. THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS, DOCUMENTS. OR MATTERS WERE THE ACCUSED WAS PERMITTED TO EXAMINE EACH. DESCRIPTION OF ITEM LOCATION OF ORIGINAL {Knot attached) Soc continuation sheet b. EACH ITEM CONSIDERED, OR A COPY OR RECITAL OF THE SUBSTANCE OR NATURE THEREOF, IS ATTACHED 14. THERE ARE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT THE ACCUSED WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OFFENSEIS) OR NOT COMPETENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEFENSE. (SEE RCM 909. warm 15. THE DEFENSE DID REOUEST OBJECTIONS TO BE NOTED IN THIS REPORT {If has. spa-cm,i In Item 2f below! 16. ALL ESSENTIAL WITNESSES WILL BE AVAILABLE IN THE EVENT OF TRIAL 17. THE CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE IN PROPER FORM 1B. REASONABLE GROUNDS EXIST TO BELIEVE THAT THE ACCUSED COMMITTED THE OFFENSEISJ ALLEGED 19. I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY GROUNDS WHICH WOULD DIS-QUALIFY ME FROM ACTING AS INVESTIGATING OFFICER. (See REM. mid) (I 1. 20. I a. TRIAL BY SUMMARY SPECIAL GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL b- OTHER (Spec-95v In Item 2! below} 21. REMARKS rfnciud'c. a: newsman expfamtionfor any delta): in the im'esligmion. and erpfanammfar am! above.) See continuation slich [For classi?ed testimony and exhibits. 5E: classi?ed annex. An unclassi?ed memorandum concoming the classified annex is attached as IO Ex. 55.] 223. TYPED NAME OFINVESTIGATING OFFICER D. GRADE c. ORGANIZATION Almanza' Pm? 0'5 I??th Judge AdvoCatc General Detachment ILSO) d. SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATING OFFICER 3. DATE I IlJan 2012 DD Form ?it?Reverse, AUG 84 UNCLASSIFIED WITH IO EXHIBIT 55 00040 Continuation Sheet. DD Form 457. U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning Item 8a. assistant defense counsel: Paul R. Bouchard. 0-3 (P). US. Army Trial Defense Service. Atlantic Branch. 4217 Roberts Ave. 3rd Floor. Fort Meade. MD 20755 Item I2a. witnesses who testified tmder oath: Lim. Steven .I.. 0-3. HQ. First Army DivisiomEast. Fort Meade. MD Fulton. Casey M.. 0-3. 2nd Bde. 10th Mountain Div.. Fort Drum. NY Adkins. Paul D-. E-7. 10th Mountain Div. Fort Drum. Balonek. Kyle 1.. W01. 10th Mountain Div.. Fart Drum. NY2 Madaras. Chad M.. E-S. 2nd Bde. 10th Mountain Div.. Fort Drum. NY Milliman. Jason A.. Palmyra. VA Cherepko. Thomas M.. 0-3. NATO Force Command Madrid. Spain Shaver. David. Computer Crimes Investigative Unit. USACIDC. Quantico. VA Baker. Eric 3.. ISL-4. 62nd Military Police Detachment. Fort Drum. NY Johnson. Mark. Computer Crimes Investigative Unit. USACIDC. Quantico. VA Showman. .Iihrleah. Syracuse. NY Bigelow. Peter .I.. E-6. AFSOUTH BN Naples. Italy Williamson. Alfred. Computer Crimes Investigative Unit. USACIDC. Quantieo. VA Edwards. Antonio. Computer Crimes Investigative Unit. USACIDC. Quantico. VA Lamo. Adrian. Carmichael. CA Padgett. Daniel. E-S. 2nd Bde. 10th Mountain Div.. Fort Drum. NY Keay. Barclay D.. 0-3. 2nd Bde. 10th Mountain Div.. Fort Drum. NY Item 13a. statements. documents. or matters considered: The documents considered are listed Evidence List). As the defense objected on the basis of lack of authentication to several categories of documentsDeterminations Regarding DefenSe Objections to Government Evidence). I determined I would consider certain documents subject to authentication. Those documents are listed below: IA Exam (Bates IA Training Requirement (Bates 003 75772) IA Virtual Training (Bates 003 75773) Virtual Training 2 (Bates 00375 774] Test Results (Bates it 00022348) Al-Qaida Recruiting Video (Bates 00408202-36) Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula Magazine Bates it 00012570-71 1) Enemy 1 Possession Evidence (HR 6 089 0563 ll (Redacted). Bates 00410660-64: Metadata display. Bates 0041065 8-59: and Forensically recovered material. Bates 0041065467} SFC Adkins invoked his Article 3] rights; I therefore detennined he was unavailable and considered his sworn statements {Bates it 000133? ~76z 000 33 78-32: 00013334-ST). 3 WOI Balonek invoked his Article 3 rights: I therefore determined he was unavailable and considered his sworn statement (Bates a 00013416-20). Continuation Sheet. DD Form 457. US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning C3 Document Bates 003 78141-4?) PFC Manning?s Military Intelligence Work Product {Range Stery Board. Bates 00410607-09; multiple SIPRN ET email dated 100112. Bates 00410613-14; Multiple SIPRNET email (Bates 00410615-1 8: SIPRNET email dated 09] I 30 Bates 00410600-021 Afghanistan War Logs Posted by WikiLeaks (Bates 00410668?70') HR 5 332 0069 10 (Bates 00410619?22) DISA Trickler Report (Bates 00410653) CIDNE data on the Internet (Bates ti 00410554) NCD Valuation Documents {Bates 00410556-60) Additionally, I considered the sworn statements of Adkins {Bates 0001337146; 00013378-82: 00013384-87) and W01 Balonek (Bates 00013416-20). who invoked their Atticle 31 rights. Attached are the following marked exhibits: IO Ex. It D) Notice of Appearance. Mr. Coombs 10 Ex. Defense Motion Requesting Recusal of Investigating Of?cer. 16 December 201 [0 Ex. 3 Writ Seeking Access to the Proceedings (not considered) 10 Ex. Sealed Defense Stipulation of Expected Testimony (not considered) [0 Ex. 5 Closed Hearing Checklist. 13 December 201 (not considered) 10 Ex. 6 Government Request for Closed Session. 15 December 201 1 10 Ex. 7 Open Hearing Checklist. 13 December 2011 {not considered) 10 Ex. 8 Closed Hearing Checklist. 19 December 201 I (not considered) 10 Ex. 9 Open Hearing Checklist. 19 December 201 1 (not considered) 10 Ex. Bates 00409680-84. 00409719-21 10 Ex. I l( P) Bates 00376856. 00409685-718 10 Ex. 12 Closed Hearing Checklist. 19 December 2011 (not considered) IO Ex. 13 Open Hearing Checklist. 19 December 201 1 (not considered) 10 Ex. 14(1)) Defense Assertion of Privilege Under NLRB. 503. 19 December 2011 10 Ex. Government Response to Defense Assertion of Privilege Under MILE. 503. 20 December 201 1 10 Ex. 16 Unclassi?ed Closed Hearing Checklist. 20 December 201 1 (not considered) 10 Ex. 17 Unclassi?ed Open Hearing Checklist. 20 December 201 I (not considered) 10 Ex. 18(1)) Bates 00410555. 00409679 [0 Ex. 19(0) [.amo Chat 10 Ex. 20 Writ-Appeal Seeking Access to the Proceedings (not considered) 10 Ex. 211D) Defense Article 32 Exhibits 10 Ex. 22 10 Appointment Memorandum. 4 August 2010 10 Ex. 23 Directive to Investigate Additional Charges Memorandum. 18 March 201 1 10 Ex. 24 Special Instructions for Article 32 Investigation Memorandum. 16 November 201 1 IO Ex. 25 Charge Sheet containing Additional Charges 1-111 and their Speci?cations. 1 March 2011 10 Ex. 26 Defense Notice Under M.R.E. 5050013). 22 November 201 1 10 Ex. 27' Article 32 Investigation Noti?cation Memorandum. 23 November 11 Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning [Article 32 Investigation Noti?cation Memorandum Acknowledgement. 28 November 1 1 Defense Motion for Closed Hearing Under R.C.M 405(h)(3), 28 November 2011 Defense Request for Production of Evidence Government Response to Defense Request for Production of Evidence, 30 November 201 1 Defense Request to Compel Production of Evidence. 1 December 2011 Defense Request for Article 32 Witnesses. 2 December 2011 Government Requested Evidence List. 2 December 2011 Government Response to Defense Request to Close Article 32 Hearing. 4 December 201 1 Defense Response to Government?s 405(h)(3) Filing, 4 December 201 1 Government Response to Defense Notice Under M.R.E-. 5 December 201 1 Government Additional Requested Evidence List. 7 December 201 1 Government Response to Defense Request for Article 32 Witnesses. December 2011 Defense Witness Justi?cation. 8 Dec-ember 201 1 Witness List, 13 December 201 1 Closure Determination. 13 December 2011 Evidence List. 14 December 2011 Determinations Regarding Defense Objections to Government Evidence. 14 December 201] Determinations as to Defense Requested Evidence. 15 December 2011 Determinations as to Defense Requested Witnesses. 15 December 201 1 Determinations as to Defense Requested Witnesses Revised. 16 December 201 1 Determinations as to Defense Requested Witnesses - Revised. 17 December 201 1 Reconsideration of Closure Determination. 20 December 201 1 Determination on Defense Assertion of Privilege Under M.R.E. 503, 21 December 2011 Defense Notice of Evidence. 23 December 201 I Memoranda concerning excludable delay. various dates E-mails discussing consideration of statements under penalty of perjury. various dates 10 Chronology Unclassi?ed memorandum. without enclosures, concerning classified annex to this report containing 10 Exhibits (C) (C) 5. 1 January 2012 Transcript of Hearing (Verbatim 16 December 201 I. Summarized 17-22 December 201 1) 14.1 00043 Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457, LLS. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning Item 21 remarks: I. Ariaivsis oftheAddr?rionat Charges and Their Speci?cations? The following supports my determination that reasonable grounds exist to believe that the accused committed the offenses alleged in Additional Charges 1-111 and their Speci?cations. In order that this document may remain unclassi?ed. have referenced Bates numbers of classi?ed documents in the record where necessary and have only included unclassi?ed references to the information contained in those documents. Also. in light ofthe voluminous record in this case, I typically simply refer to Bates numbers of documents instead of referring to documents attached as hard copy exhibits. Additional Charge 1 and its Speci?cation (Art. 104, UCMJ): Lent- In order to prove this offense, the government must establish the following four elements: 1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq, between on or about 1 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010. the accused, without proper authority, knowingly gave intelligence information to certain persons, namely: Al-Qaida. Al?Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, and a person or entity speci?ed in Bates 00410660-64: that the accused did so through indirect means: (3) that Al-Qaida, Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, and a person or entity speci?ed in Bates 00410660-64 were enemies; and that this intelligence information was true, at least in part. ?Intelligence? means any helpful information. given to and received by the enemy, which is true, at least in part. ?Enemy? includes not only organized opposing forces in time of war, but also any other hostile body that our forces may be opposing such as a rebellious mob or a band of renegade-s and includes civilians as well as members of military organizations. Under US. v. Batchei'or. 22 C.M.R. 144. 158 (CMA. 1956), ?Article 104(2) ofthe Code does not require a specific criminal intent of any sort" and thus is a general intent crime. Charges were initially prefen?ed against the accused on 5 July 2010. On 18 Mar 201 l. the convening authority informed me that those Original charges were dismissed and directed me not to consider them. See 10 Ex. 23. 4 Continuation Sheet, no ram 457, ms. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning Facts The evidence showed that PFC Manning knew the enemy received information from WikiLeal-tsfl The evidence also showed that from November 2009 through May 2010. there were over one hundred searches for WikiLeaks under PFC Manning?s user pro?les on his primary and secondary SIPRNET computers.5 More generally. the evidence showed the accused knew that our adversaries, including enemy governments and non-government organizations such as terrorists. obtained information via the Internet because he was required to conduct a training presentation on Operational Security as corrective training when he was at Advanced Individual Training on 13 J1me 21003." Additionally. the evidence showed that the accused was a trained intelligence analyst who was developing his skills during the deployment? Finally, the evidence showed that PFC Manning signed non-disclosure agreements stating that ?unauthorized disclosure ofclassi?ed information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation."3 It is reasonable to infer from these facts that the accused knew enemies ofthe United States would receive information released by WikiLeaks. The evidence showed that the accused, at or near Contingency Operating Base Hammer,? between on or about 1 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010. knowingly gave intelligence information to WikiLeaks. including: a video file named ?12 JUL 07' CZ ENGAGEMENT ZONE 30 more than one classi?ed memorandum produced by a United States Government intelligence agency; the IDNE-lraq database; the CIDNE Afghanistan database; a United States Southern Command database. more than ?ve classified records relating to a military operation in Farah Province, Afghanistan, occurring on or about 4 May 2009; a ?le named PAXzip? containing a video named 2'2 PAX.wmv;" the Department of State Net-Centric Diplomacy database; a classi?ed record produced by a United States Army intelligence organization, dated 18 March 2008; and the United States Forces Iraq Microsoft Outlookaharepoint Exchange Server global address list.m While some of this information was not classi?ed, the evidence showed that it is all ?intelligence information" in that it would be helpful for the enemy to possess and was true, at least in part. For example, the CIDNE databases contained a vast amount of information concerning enemy tactics and the US. military?s response to those tactics.II while the last item listed, the global address list. would be ?i See Army intelligence Forensic Report, Bates if 0046452-66 and attachments. 5 Testimony of SA Shaver. See PFC Manning's External Hard Drive Forensic Report, Bates 00l25270-3 8. in particular Bates it 001253 I4- 16- for a copy of the PowerPoint presentation the accused gave. SF Madrid also testi?ed that the accused?s corrective training presentation explained that it could be dangerous to disclose classified information because outside entities could seek U.S. information. Additionally. SFC Madrid teati?ed that the accused also submitted a typed document providing more detail. including references to the relevant regulations. Testimony Fulton. See PFC Manning?s Non-Disclosure Agreements. Bates 0002291243. {10(136801-02. Throughout the hearing. the witnesses typically referred to Hammer? rather than ?Contingency Operating Base Hammer." [1 was clear. however. that they were referring to the same place. '0 The analysis of Speci?cations 246 of Additional Charge II provides more detail about the offense conduct involving each ofthese items. Testimony Fulton. 00045 Continuation Sheet, on Form 457, vs. v. PFC Bradley E. Mending helpful for the enemy to possess in that it would enable the enemy to engage in ?Spearfishing,? a targeted attempt to gain from an unsuspecting source by masquerading as someone the source trusts: speci?c information such as knowledge of full names and emails facilitates Spearfishng because it is more likely to make the targeted source believe the spear?sher is legitimate. While the evidence did not show that PFC Manning directly provided this intelligence information to Al-Qaida, Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, or the person or entity speci?ed in Bates 00410660-64. the evidence did show that PFC Manning provided this intelligence information to WikiLeaks. and that enemies of the United States possessed this information. For example. the video named ??12 Jul 07 CZ ENGAGEMENT ZONE 20 SC Anyoneavi" is contained in the recruiting video produced by Al-Qaida?s media arml3 and is described as ?footage published by the WikiLeaks website," which clearly indicates that the enemy obtained this video from WikiLeaks. That video also speci?cally references the leak of a State Department cable, which indicates they obtained the cable from WikiLeaks. and also references WikiL-eaks documents describing communications by leaders in Islamic countries with the United States. which also indicates they are referring to State Department cables they obtained from WikiLeaks. Another example is that the evidence showed the CIDNEeAfghanistan information was available to the enemy via the Internet."1 The accused therefore indirectly provided this intelligence information to the enemy by providing it to WikiLeaks. The evidence also showed that Al-Qaida. Al?Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. and the classified person or entity speci?ed in Bates 00410660-64 are enemies of the United States. First. the recruiting video produced by Al-Qaida?s media arm'5 exhorts the viewer to attack the United States. Similarly. the Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula ?Inspire? magazines and associated explanatory materialsm make clear that AQAP is also an enemy of the United States. Finally. the description of the classi?ed person or entity specified in Bates 00410660-64 leaves little doubt as to whether that person or entity is an enemy of the United States. The evidence also showed that the information at issue is true. at least in part. For example. the video entitled ?12 JUL 07 CZ ENGAGEMENT ZONE 30 GC. Anyoneavi" depicts what it depicts. There was no evidence that any of the information at issue was false. Although this offense is a general intent crime. the evidence showed that PFC Manning made statements during a counseling session with then-SPC Showman prior to the deployment to the effect that the American flag meant nothing to him and that he held no allegiance to this country or to its people.? While this statement was made in the context of a counseling session that PFC Manning was not pleased to be participating in. and thus may have been made printerin to ?push the buttons" of the person counseling him. PFC Manning was a trained intelligence analyst and should have known not to make such a statement flippantly. Accordingly. there are reasonable '2 Testimony of SA Bettencourt. '3 Bates a Data on the Internet, Bates it '5 Bates is: 00403202?236. Bates a 00012570-711. '7 Testimony of Ms. Showman in defense-requested closed session. 6 Continuation Sheet, DDForm 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Man-ding grounds to believe that PFC Manning meant what he said. which turn would support the requisite criminal intent were this a specific intent crime. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Additional Charge I and its Speci?cation. Additional Charge 11, Speci?cation 1 (Art. 134, UCMJ): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following two elements: (I that at our near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq. between on or about 1 November 2009 and on or about 27 May 2010. the accused wrongfully and wantonly caused intelligence belonging to the United States to be published on the Internet, having knowledge that intelligence published on the Internet is accessible to the enemy; and that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was ofa nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. ?Conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline" is conduct which causes a reasonably direct and obvious injury to good order and discipline. ?Service discrediting conduct" is conduct which tends to harm the reputation of the service or lower it in public esteem. Facts The facts at issue here are similar to those discussed above concerning Additional Charge I and its Speci?cation. Speci?cally. there is little doubt that between the dates and at the location alleged. PFC Manning caused intelligence belonging to the United States to be published on the Internet by providing it to WikiLeaks. and that when he did so he knew intelligence published on the Internet is accessible to the enemy. Additionally. testimony was presented that PFC Manning?s conduct was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. '8 The evidence showed that it is impossible to control or verify each and every download or transfer ofinformation that intelligence conduct. due to the tempo of operations in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility such as the facility where PFC Manning worked in Iraq. Because of this. the evidence showed that trust is important in protecting classi?ed information.? PFC Manning's violations of that trust prejudiced good order and discipline and also discredited the service. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 1 of Additional Charge 11. '3 Testimony Lim. Testimony Lim and Fulton. 00047 Continuation Sheet. DD ?rm 457. U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Additittnal Charge ll. Speci?cation 2 (Art. 134. 18 U.S.C. 793(e)): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following five elements: (1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 15 February 2010 and on or about 5 April 2010. the accused had unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense. to wit: a video file named ?12 JUL 07 C2 ENGAGEMENT ZONE 30 GC Anyoneavi"; (2) that the accused had reason to believe such information could be used to the injury ofthe United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation; (3) that the accused willfully communicated. delivered. transmitted. or caused to be communicated, delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it; {24) that 18 U.S.C. section 793(c) exists; and (5) that the accused's conduct was prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces?? Facts The evidence showed that "l 2 .lul 07" was searched for from both of PFC Manning?s primary and secondary SIPRNET computers? The evidence also showed that the Apache air Strike video located on the network share drive belonging to the 2nd Brigade Combat Team. 10th Mountain Division. Of?ce of the Staff Judge Advocate. exactly matched a video identi?ed in PFC Manning?s user pro?le on PFC Manning?s primary SIPRNET computer}: The evidence also showed that a D-RW containing a video named "12 JUL 07 CZ ENGAGEMENT ZONE 30 GC An onewmv" was accessed using PFC Manning?s personal Macintosh computer on 15 Feb 22.010.?3 Additionally. the evidence showed that a CD-RW created on 27 April 2010 containing a video named ?12 JUL 07 ENGAGEMENT ZONE 30 Anyonewmv" (which did not have all of the content of the video found on PFC Manning's primary SIPRNET computer). with a sticker on it. was found in PFC Manning?s on-post quarters!? The evidence showed that WikiLeaks released this video on 5 April 2010.2? While there was no digital forensic evidence from PFC Manning's personal computer directly indicating that this video was uploaded to WikiLeaks. the forensic examination did ?nd evidence in Unallocated Clusters (UC) (brie?y. areas on a disk where the data has been "deleted" but still 3? These elements are a tailored version of Eighth Circuit Model Jury Instruction 6.18.1030A. 2' Intetink Logs Forensic Report. Bates it 00375] ?5429. at page I I (this document also has the relevant dates}. 23 lo"1 Mountain Shares Forensic Report. Bates tr 00046074-00046097. at 22. 33 See PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00 l24283?362. at pages 48-49. ?m Sec PFC Manning?s CD Forensic Report. Bates 00l995] 1-522. at pages 1. 7-8. 1? PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates rt at Attachment 5. Bates tr 00I25269 (carved_ 8408_72473024123_Collateral 8 00048 Continuation Sheet. DD Form 457, US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning remains on the disk and can be recovered forensically) of multiple references to the WikiLeaks upload webpage. including a webpage containing a link to upload documents to WikiLeaks. and also references indicating a possible upload of the Farah records gsee discussion of Additional Charge 11, Speci?cation 10. below] to the WikiLeaks website.?? Moreover, PFC Manning's chats with a person using the user name. aliased as Nathaniel Frank from 22 February 2010 to 25 March 2010, and as Julian Assange {editor of WikiLeaks) from 17 May 2010 to 24 May 2010 discussed uploading material to ?v'ifikiLeaks.27 These facts. taken together. provide circumstantial evidence that PFC Manning uploaded the video to WikiLeaks. The evidence also showed that on 19 May 2010. in an email exchange with Eric Schmiedl. PFC Manning wrote. "Are you familiar with WikiLeaks." and then alter receiving an affirmative reply from Mr. Schmiedl. then wrote. was the source of the 12 JUL 07 video from the Apache Weapons Team. which killed the two journalists and injured two kids.?23 Additionally. the evidence showed that the accused. in his chats with Mr. Lame, admitted forwarding the video that is the subject of this speci?cation. also referred to as the ?collateral murder? or video. to WikiLeaks. In those chats. a person using the ?bradassST' screen name. who Mr. Lamo determined to be the accused. made the following statements: (1) ?the CM video came from a server in our domain! and not a single person noticed? (2) in response to Lamo?s question about what CM meant. "Apache Weapons Team video of 12 Jul 07 airstrike on Reuters some sketchy but fairly normal and civilians" (3) in response to Lamo's question of where he (Lame) could transmit similar material if he had it. "wl.org submission system?; and (4) "i couldn't let these things stay inside of the and inside of my head i recognized the value of some knew what they dug deeper i watched that video cold. for instance at ?rst it wasjust a bunch of guys getting shot up by a no big about two dozen more where that came from but something struck me as odd with the van thing-.. and also the fact it was being stored in a JAG officer's so i looked into eventually tracked down the date, and then the exact GPS and i was ok. so thats what then i went to the regular internet. .. and it was still on my so i typed into goog. .. the date. and the and then I see this 3iraq.html i kept that in my mind for probably a month and a before 1 forwarded it to ?.29 them. 36 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124233662. at 05-67. 27 PFC Manning's Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates at 00124283662. at 20-32. 76. is See PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00124233662. at page 44. Note that the login password for PFC Manning?s personal computer was ??1?Wink149213." which also was the for PFC Manning?s GPG keyring which contained a key used to emails between Schmied] and PFC Manning. The forensic examiner concluded "it is likely that PFC Manning neglected to enable when sending the message quoted above. M, at 45. "TWin I 492!!" was also identi?ed as a password for several instant messaging accounts. including a variation of this password. was identi?ed as the password for id. at 14. The commonality among these passwords indicates that the same individual used them. ?9 Lamo Chat1 10 Ex. 19(0). at 25-26. (This chat is also in the forensic reports at Lamo Forensic Report, Bates a 0012410Ti3 I- at Attachment J.) During his testimony. Mr. Lame explained that the person using the Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457, US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning The evidence showed that WikiLeaks released this video on 5 April 2010.3? WikiLeaks was not entitled to receive this video. which relates to the national defense because it depicts the activities of the military. Also. the evidence shows that PFC Manning had reason to believe that the video could be used to the injury of the United States in that PFC Manning knew the enemy accessed information avaiIable on the Internet. Additionally. 18 793(e') exists. Finally, PFC Manning?s conduct in providing this video to WikiLeaks is prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Specification 2 of Additional Charge 11. Additional Charge ll. Speci?cation 3 (Art. 134. 18 U.S.C. 793(6): Law in order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 22 March 2010 and on or about 26 March 2010. the accused had unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense. to wit: more than one classi?ed memorandum produced by a United States Government intelligence agency: (2) that the accused had reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation: (3) that the accused willfully communicated. delivered. transmitted. or caused to be communicated, delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it; (4) that 18 U.S.C. section 793(c_) exists; and (5) that the accused's conduct was prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Facts The memoranda at issue are at Bates 00378084-090 and were produced by a United States government intelligence agency. The evidence showed they were properly classified.? 1 online identity identi?ed himself as Bradley Manning by sending Lamo a friend request when Lamo asked ifhe was a tacebook user and also by providing Lamo PFC Manning?s AKO account user name and password. lntelink Logs Forensic Report, Bates 003751 16-129. at 9. 3' See document at Bates a 003781484 T5. 10 Continuation Sheet. no ?rm 457. US. v. PFC Bradley E. Moreover. the evidence showed that PFC Manning knew they were classi?ed because they were properly marked. Testimony during the classi?ed portion of the hearing described the acgessing and manipulation of these memoranda on PFC Manning's primary SIPRNET computer?? Analysis of PFC Manning?s personal computer showed a containing a ?le named "blahzip" was burned on an unknown Windows computer at 12:55 on 22 March 2010 and was accessed on PFC Manning?s personal computers? The evidence also showed that on 22 March 2010. a user ofPF Manning?s user account viewed .pdf ?les of the memoranda at issue on his primary SIPRNET account: the forensic examiner concluded that the sequence of viewing the ?les and then accessing the ?le ?could indicate [the memoranda at issue] were compressed in blahzip.?1H The contents of the memoranda are such that a person familiar with them would conclude that if released they could be used to the injury of the United States. While there was no digital forensic evidence from PFC. Manning's personal computer directly indicating that these memoranda were uploaded to WikiLeal-ts, the forensic examination did ?nd evidence in Unallocated Clusters (UC) (briefly. areas on a disk where the data has been ?deleted? but still remains on the disk and can be recovered forensically] ofmultiple references to the WikiLealts upload webpage. including a webpage containing a link to upload documents to WikiLeaks. and also references indicating a possible upload of the Farah records (see discussion of Additional Charge 11. Speci?cation 10. below) to the WikiLeaks website.35 Moreover. PFC Manning?s chats with a person using the user name. aliased as Nathaniel Frank from 22 February 2010 to 25 March 2010, and as Julian Assange (editor of WikiLeaks) from 17 May 2010 to 24 May 2010 discussed uploading material to WikiLeaks.3? These facts. taken together. provide circumstantial evidence that PFC Manning uploaded the memoranda to WikiLeal-zs. WikiLeaks was not entitled to receive these memoranda. which relate to the national defense. Also. the evidence shows that PFC. Manning had reason to believe that the video could be used to the injury of the United States in that PFC Manning knew the enemy accessed information available on the Internet. Additionally. 18 U.S.C. 793 exists. Finally. PFC Manning?s conduct in providing this video to WikiLeaks is prejudicial to good order and discipline and service disorcditing. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 3 of Additional Charge 11. 32 Classi?ed testimony of SA Shaver. 10 Ex. (C) 5 (including relevant dates). 3" 10th Mountain Shares Forensic report. Bates at 2 I -22: PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it? 0012-4283-3623. at 49. 34 PFC Manning's Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates 002] l037?l 10. at 50. 72. 35 PFC Manning's Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00l24283?362. at 65-67. 17-73. 3'5 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00l24283-362. at 20-32. 76. ll Continuation Sheet, DD form 457. US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning Additional Charge ll. Specification 4 (Art. 134. 18 U.S.C. 641): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following five elements: (1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 31 December 2009 and on or about 5 January 2010. the accused voluntarily. intentionally and knowingly stole. purloined. or converted a thing ofvalue. to wit: the Combined Information Data Network Iraq database containing more than 380.000 recordsanother: that the thing ofvalue belonged to the United States and had a value in excess ol?One Thousand Dollars (3) that the accu5ed did so with intent to deprive the owner of the use or bene?t ofthe thing of value so tat-ten: (4) that 18 USC. section 641 exists; and (5) that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. The word ?value?? means the face. par. or market value. or cost price. either wholesale or retail. whichever is greater. A "thing ofvalue" can be tangible or intangible property. It is not necessary to prove that the accused knew that the Government owned the property at the time of the wrengful taking so long as it is established that the Government did in fact own the money or property involved. that it had a value in excess of One Thousand Dollars and that the accused knowingly and willfully stole. purloined. or converted it.? Facts The evidence showed that an SD Card recovered from the residence of PFC Manning's aunt contained an archive file named When using the password mentioned above. this ?le contained the complete CIDNE databases for Afghanistan (91.91 1 reports) and Iraq (391.883 reports). It also contained a ?le describing the contents and stating. "It?s already been sanitized of any source identifying information. You might need to sit on this information. perhaps 90?180 days. to ?gure out how best to release such a large amount ofdata. and to protect source. This is possibly one of the more signi?cant documents of our time. removing the fog of war. and revealing the true nature of215t century asymmetric warfare. Have a good day."3 37 These elements are a tailored version ofEighlh Circuit Model Jury Instruction 6.18.641. "m PFC Manning?s SD lCart! Forensic Report. Bates it 001253 l9-3 l. at 1-2. 9. Continuation Sheet, no FTi'rm 457.113. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning The evidence showed that PFC Manning was at his aunt's residence on or about 26 January The evidence also showed that WikiLeaks released 391.840 reports from the IDNE- Iraq database.?m The evidence also showed that in Unallocated Clusters on PFC Manning?s personal computer. there was information ?liker obtained? from the database and that documents containing the same text and associated photographs were found in PFC Manning?s SIPRNET shared folder; the forensic examiner concluded is likely the photos and documents in PFC SIPRNET shared folder were copied to [his] personal computer through the use of removable While there was no digital forensic evidence from PFC Manning's persOnal cemputer directly indicating that the database was uploaded to WikiLeaks. the forensic examination did find evidence in Unallocated Clusters of multiple references to the WikiLeaks upload webpag?e. including a webpage containing a link to upload documents to WikiLeaks. and also references indicating a possible upload of the Farah records (see discussion of Additional Charge II. Speci?cation 10. below) to the WikiLeaks website.? Moreover. PFC Manning?s chats with a person using the user name. aliased as Nathaniel Frank from 22 February 2010 to 25 March 2010. and as Julian Assange {editor of WikiLeaks) from 17 May 2010 to 24 Ma}.r 2010 discussed uploading material to WikiLeaks.4" These facts. taken together. provide circumstantial evidence that PFC Manning uploaded the database to WikiL-eaks. PFC Manning?s comments in the "read me? document quoted above indicate that he converted the database another in that he wanted to make this information public and thus deprive its owner. the United States. of its use or bene?t. While PFC Manning in his duties as an intelligence analyst deployed to Iraq had reason to use the lDNE-Iraq database every day}1 he had no authorization to take this database from its owner and thus his taking it constituted stealing it. While there was no direct evidence provided of the value of the database. there was evidence provided that the valuation of the Net-Centric Diplomacy database was over $4 million.45 This circumstantial evidence supports a conclusion that the value of the database was over $1.000. The evidence showed that 13 U.S.C. 641 exists and that PFC Manning's conduct in stealing the database and converting WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 4 of Additional Charge 11. 39 PFC Manning's so Card Forensic Report. Bates 0012531941. at 7. 4? CIDNE Files Forensic Report. Bates it 0005431117. at 5; Testimony of SA Bettencourt (CIDN E-lraq database released in October 20101. 4' PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00124283662. at 62-63. 41 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 0012-4233-3362. at 65-67- 77-78. ?3 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00124283362. at 20-33. 1'6. 4" Testimony Lim. ?5 NCD valuation Documents. Bates ou4tosso-oo. 11 Continuation Sheet, DD lit-frm 457., v. PFC Bradley E. Mannii'ig Additional Charge II, Speci?cation 5 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 793(e)): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 31 December 2009 and on or about 9 February 2010. the accused had unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense. to wit: more than twenty classi?ed records from the Combined Information Data Network Exchange Iraq database; (2) that the accused had reason to believe that the information he possessed could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation; that the accused willfully communicated. delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it: that 13 U.S.C. section 793(e'1exists; and that, under the circumstances. the conduct ofthe accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was ofa nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Farm The evidence showed that an SD Card recovered from the residence of PFC Manning?s aunt contained an archive file named When using the password mentioned above. this ?le contained the complete CIDNE databases for Afghanistan (91.91 1 reports) and Iraq (391.883 reports). It also contained a tile describing the contents and stating, ?It?s already been sanitized of any source identifying information. You might need to sit on this information. perhaps 90-180 days. to figure out how best to release such a large amount of data. and to protect source. This is possibly one of the more signi?cant documents of our time. removing the fog of war. and revealing the true nature of 21st century asymmetric warfare. Have a good day."46 The evidence showed that PFC Manning was at his aunt?s residence on or about 26 January 2010.? The evidence also showed that WikiLeaks released 391.340 reports from the CIDNE- Iraq database.? The evidence also showed that in Unallocated Clusters on PFC Manning's personal computer. there was information ?liker obtained" from the database and that documents containing the same text and associated photographs were found in PF Manning?s SIPRNET shared folder: the forensic examiner concluded is likely the photos *5 PFC Manning?s so Card Forensic Report. Bates a 0012531931, at I-2. 9. 4? PFC Manning?s SD Card Forensic Report. Bates ti {1013531961, at ?13 CIDNE Files Forensic Report. Bates 0005431241 at 5; Testimony ofSA Bettencourt database released in October 2010'). 14 Continuation Sheet, DD Foi'm 457.. US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning and documents in PFC MANNINGS SIPRNET shared folder were copied to {his} personal Computer through the use of removable media?? While there was no digital forensic evidence from PFC Manning?s personal computer directly indicating that the database was Uploaded to WikiLeaks. the forensic examination did ?nd evidence in Unallocated Clusters of multiple references to the WikiLeaks upload webpage. including a webpage containing a link to upload documents to WikiLeaks. and also references indicating a possible upload of the Farah records (see discussion of Additional Charge Speci?cation 10. below) to the WikiLeaks website.30 Moreover, PFC Manning?s chats with a person using the pressassociation@jabber.ecc.de user name. aliased as Nathaniel Frank from 22 February 2010 to 25 March 2010, and as Julian Assange (editor of WikiLeaks) from 17 May 2010 to 24 May 2010 discussed uploading material to ?.lv'ikiLeaks.SI These facts. taken together. provide circumstantial evidence that PFC Manning uploaded the IDNE?lraq database to WikiLeal-ts. PFC. Manning?s comments in the ?read me" document quoted above indicate that he knew the database would be released and that the information contained in the reports. by ?removing the fog of war" concerning actions in which US. military forces were involved. could be used to the injury of the United States. His statement in that document that the recipient needed to "sit on the information to protect source? indicates that he knew WikiLeaks was not entitled to receive this information. The evidence showed that there were more than twenty of these and that they were properly classi?ed and remain classified.S3 The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C.. 793(e) exists and that PFC Manning's conduct in providing the database to WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Specification 5 of Additional Charge ll. Additional Charge ll, Speci?cation 6 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 641): Law in order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: "9 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00124233362. at 62-63. 5? PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00124283662. at 65-67. 71-78. 5] PFC Manningis Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124233662. at 20-32. 76. 53 Bates is 00377912473021 53 Classi?cation Review. Bates is 00376879302. Continuation Sheet, DD [form 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning (1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 31 December 2009 and on or about 8 January 2010. the accused voluntarily. intentionally and knowingly stole, purloined. or converted a thing of value. to wit: the Combined Information Data Network Afghanistan database containing more than 90.000 recordsanother: (2) that the thing of value belonged to the United States and had a value in excess of One Thousand Dollars 3) that the accused did so with intent to deprive the owner of the use or benefit of the thing of value so taken: that 18 U.S.C. section 641 exists; and that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was ofa nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Facts The evidence showed that an SD Card recovered from the residence of PFC Manning?s aunt contained an archive ?le named 00KM380lyada.tar.bz2.nc." When using the password mentioned above. this ?le contained the complete IDNE databases for Afghanistan (91.911 reports) and Iraq (391.383 reports). It also contained a ?le describing the contents and stating. ?It?s already been sanitized of any source identifying information. You might need to sit on this information. perhaps 90-180 days, to ?gure out how best to release such a large amount of data, and to protect source. This is possibly one of the more signi?cant documents of our time. removing the fog of war. and revealing the true nature of 21 st century asynu'netric warfare. Have a good day.?5 The evidence showed that PFC Manning was at his aunt's residence on or about 26 January 2010.::5 The evidence also showed that WikiLeaks released 74.278 reports from the CIDNE- Afghanistan database.5h The evidence showed that between 1 January 2010 and 7 January 2010. there were 372 connections from the server containing the CIDNE-At?ghanistan database and PFC Manning?s secondary SIPRNET computer. resulting in the transfer of 256.76 MB of data to PFC Manning?s secondary SIPRNET computer.?Tr The evidence showed that the ?last modi?ed? date for the ClDNE-Afghanistan ?le contained in the yata.tar.bz2.nc lile mentioned above was 8 January 5* PFC Manning?s so Card Forensic Report. Bates [1012531931. at 1-2. 9. 5i PFC Manning?s SD Card Forensic Report. Bates 00125319-31. at 7. 5" CIDNE Files Forensic Report. Bates 000543 I 2-12. at 5; Testimony ofSA Bettencourt (CIDNE-Afghanistan database released in July 2010). 5? Centaur Logs Forensic Report. Bates it 0004656176. at 1. 16 Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457, US. v. PFC Bradley E. 2010.58 The entirety of the ClDNE-Afghanistan database so downloaded was located during the forensic examination of PFC Manning?s SD cards? While there was no digital forensic evidence from PFC Manning?s personal computer directly indicating that the ClDNE-Afghanistan database was uploaded to Wild Leaks. the forensic examination did ?nd evidence in Unallocated Clusters of multiple references to the WikiLeaks upload webpage, including a webpage containing a link to upload documents to Wild Leaks. and also references indicating a possible upload of the Farah records (see discussion of Additional Charge Speci?cation 10. below) to the WikiLeaks website.? Moreover, PFC Manning?s chats with a person using the user name. aliased as Nathaniel Frank from 22 February 2010 to 25 March 2010, and as Julian Assange (editor of WikiLeaks) from 17 May 2010 to 24 May 2010 discussed uploading material to WikiLeaks.? These facts, taken together, provide circumstantial evidence that PFC Manning uploaded the lDNE-Afghanistan database to WikiLeaks. PFC Manning?s comments in the ?read me" document quoted above indicate that he converted the database another in that he wanted to make this information public and thus deprive its owner, the United States, of its use or bene?t. While PFC Manning in his duties as an intelligence analyst deployed to Iraq had reason to use the database every day. he had no need to access the CIDNE-Afghanistan databasel'2 and he had no authorization to take this database from its owner and thus his taking it constituted stealing it. While there was no direct evidence provided of the value of the CIDNE-Afghanistan database. there was evidence provided that the valuation of the Net-Centric Diplomacy database was over $4 million.? This circumstantial evidence supports a conclusion that the value of the Iraq database. was over 351.000. The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C . 641 exists and that PFC Manning's conduct in stealing the database and converting WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Specification 6 of Additional Charge II. Additional Charge ll, Speci?cation 7 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 793(e)): Lun- 5? PFC Manning's so Card Forensic Report, Bates 001253 use I, at 940. 59 Centaur Logs Forensic Report. Bates it at 7. 6? PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124233662, at 65-67. 77-78. PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124233662, at 20-32. 76. ?51 Testimony Lim. 5" NCD Valuation Documents. Bates 00410556-?0. l7 Continuation Sheet, DD ?irm 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: (1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 31 December 2009 and on or about 9 February 2010. the accused had unauthorized possession of informatiOn relating to the national defense. to wit: more than twenty classi?ed records from the Combined Information Data Network Exchange Afghanistan database; that the accused had reason to believe that the information he possessed could be used to the injury of the United States Or to the advantage of any foreign nation: that the accused willfully communicated. delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it: that 18 U.S.C. section T93te) exists; and (5) that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was ofa nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Fa The evidence showed that an SD Card recovered from the residence of PFC Manning?s aunt contained an archive file named When using the password mentioned above. this ?le contained the complete CIDNE databases for Afghanistan (91.91 1 reports) and Iraq (391.883 reports). It also contained a file describing the contents and stating. ?It?s already been sanitized of any source identifying information. You might need to sit on this information. perhaps 90-180 days. to ?gure out how best to release such a large amount of data. and to protect source. This is possibly one of the more signi?cant documents of our time. removing the fog of war, and revealing the true nature of let century asymmetric warfare. Have a good days?!5 The evidence showed that PFC Manning was at his aunt's residence on or about 26 January 10.65 The evidince also showed that WikiLeaks released 74.778 reports from the ClDNE-Afghanistan database. The evidence showed that between 1 January 2010 and 7 January 2010. there were 372 connections from the server containing the ClDNE-Afghanistan database and PFC Manning's secondary SIPRNET computer. resulting in the transfer of256.76 MB of data to PFC Manning's secondary SIPRNET computer)? The evidence showed that the ?last modi?ed" date for the ClDNE-Afghanistan ?le contained in the yata.tar.b22.nc ?le mentioned above was 8 January PFC Manning?s so Card Forensic Report, Bates at 0012531941. at 1-2, 9. 6} PFC Manning?s SD Card Forensic Report, Bates 0012531961. at CIDNE Files Forensic Report. Bates 0005431241?. at 5; Testimony ot'SA Bettencourt (ClDNE-Afghanistan database reteased in July 2010'}. 5?7 Centaur Logs Forensic Report. Bates a 0004656746. at 18 Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457, US. v. PFC Bradley E. Mannihg 2010.?8 The entirety of the lDNE-Afghanistan database so downloaded was located during the forensic examination of PFC Manning?s SD card)? While there was no digital forensic evidence from PFC Manning?s personal computer indicating that the CIDN E-Afghanistan database was uploaded to WikiLeaks. the forensic examination did ?nd evidence in Unallocated Clusters of multiple references to the WiltiLealts upload webpage. including a webpage containing a link to upload documents to WikiLeaks. and also references indicating a possible upload of the Farah records (see discussion of Additional Charge 11. Speci?cation 10. below} to the WikiLeaks websitem Moreover. PFC Marming?s chats with a person using the user name. aliased as Nathaniel Frank from 22 February 2010 to 25 March 2010. and as Julian Assange (editor of WikiLeaks) from 17 May 2010 to 24 May 2010 discussed uploading material to WileE?kS.? These facts, taken together, provide circumstantial evidence that PFC Manning uploaded the ClDNE-Afghanistan database to WikiLeaks. PFC Manning?s comments in the ?read me" document quoted above indicate that he knew the database would be released and that the information contained in the reports. by "removing the fog of war" concerning actions in which US. military forces were involved. could be used to the injury of the United States. His statement in that document that the recipient needed to ?sit on the information to protect source" indicates that he knew WikiLeaks was not entitled to receive this information. While PFC Manning in his duties as an intelligence analyst deployed to Iraq had reason to use the lDNE-lraq database every day. he had no need to access the CIDNE- Afghanistan database. 72 The evidence showed that there were more than twenty of these documents?3 and that the}r were properly classified and remain classified.H The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C. 793(e) exists and that PFC Manning?s conduct in providing the database to WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 7 of Additional Charge 11. Additional Charge ll. Speci?cation 8 (Art. 134. 18 U.S.C. 641): Low 5?3 PFC Manning?s so Card Forensic Report. Bates :7 001253 19-3 1. at 9.10. 6" Centaur Logs Forensic Report. Bates it 00046567-1?6. at 7. 7" PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124233662. at 65-61 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 0012-4233-3631. at 20-32. 76. Testimony Lim. 1' Bates 71 0037784667791 1. 7* Classi?cation Review. Bates 7: 00376879302. Continuation Sheet, DD Farm 457, v. PFC Bradley E. Mandi?rig In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: i that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, on or about 8 March 2010, the accused voluntarily. intentionally and knowingly stole, purloined. or converted a thing of value. to wit: a United States Southern Command database containing more than 700 records belonging to the United States government another; that the thing of value belonged to the United States and had a value in excess of One Thousand Dollars that the accused did so with intent to deprive the owner of the use or bene?t of the thing of value so taken; that 18 U.S.C. section 641 exists: and (5) that. under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. acts The evidence showed that a user of PFC Manning?s primary and secondary SIPRN ET computers searched for retention of interrogation videos. initially On 23 November 2009, and during the month of March 2010 conducted over 700 searches using wget commands (which are used to download ?les from a web server} pertaining to Guantanamo Bay detainees. The forensic examiner downloaded the same documents using the same program, and veri?ed that those documents were the same documents on the WikiLeaks website by comparing them.? The forensic examiner also found four complete JTF Guantanamo Bay detainee assessments on PFC Manning?s primary computer under PFC Manning?s user profile;6 Moreover, in his chats with Mr. Lamo, PFC Manning admitted providing these documents to WikiLeaks in the following statements: ?oh, the TF GTMO Assange has those too;" and. a?er Lamo said he read those papers and asked if Assange had "[a]nything else interesting on his table", PFC. Manning said. ?idk don?t know] i only know what I provide hint."1r The evidence showed there was no work related reason For PFC Manning to search for Guantanamo er Guantanamo detainee assessments.78 The evidence showed that the terms or keywords ?Guantanamo? or were searched for from PFC Manning's primary and secondary SIPRNET computers a total of I 7 times?3 The Ti Testimony ofSA Shaver. Testimony of SA Shaver. 7" Lamo Chat. [0 Ex. 19in). at 44. 7? Testimony Fulton: Testimony Lim. lntelink Log Files Forensic Report. Bates 003 751 115-129. at 9. 20 Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning evidence also showed that the wget command was used 793 times to download documents pertaining to Guantanamo detainees from PFC Manning's primary SIPRNET computer.1m The evidence showed that on 8 March 2010. in an online chat with e, aliased to Nathaniel Frank at the time but later aliased to Julian Assange (editor PFC Manning made statements including: ?anyway im throwing everything I got on GTMO at you should take a while to get up the Stunmaryfhistoryfhealth conditionsfreasons for retaining or transfer of nearly every detainee I have a that organizes the info as much as possible."32 Additionally, the forensic examination of PFC Manning?s personal computer found evidence in Unallocated Clusters of multiple references to the WikiL-eaks upload webpage. including a webpage containing a link to upload documents to WikiLeaks. and also references indicating a possible upload of the Farah records (see discussion of Additional Charge ll. Speci?cation 10. below] to the WikiLeaks websites?; These facts, taken together. support the conclusion that PFC Manning uploaded the Southern Command database to WikiLeaks. The evidence showed that between 24 April 2011 and 21 June 2011 WikiLeaks released 765 detainee assessment briefs. documents pertaining to detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Cuba.34 PFC Manning?s comments in his chats with Mr. Lamo about why he released documents to WikiLeaks indicate that that he converted this database another in that he wanted to make this information public and thus deprive its owner. the United States. of its use or benelfitf'l?S PFC Manning had no need to access Guantanamo detainee assessments for hisjob??' and he had no authorization to take this database from its owner and thus his taking it constituted stealing it. While there was no direct evidence provided of the value of the Southern Command database. there was evidence provided that the valuation of the Net?Centric Diplomacy database was over $4 millions? There was also evidence provided that the value of the information WikiLeaks possessed was 12 million pounds. or between $15-20 million.? This circumstantial evidence supports a conclusion that the value of the Southern Command database was over $1.000. 3" lntelink Log Files Forensic Report. Bates 003751 I6- I 29, at 12. 31 The evidence showed that a person using the ?de user name was aliased as Nathaniel Frank from 22 February 2010 to 25 March 20 it). and as Julian Assange {editor ofWikiLeal-ts) from 17' May 20l0 to 24 May 2010. PFC Manning's Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates ti 00I24283-362. at 20-32. 76. 3: PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 0012-4233-3622. at 23. 33 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124233-362. at 65-67, $4 Testimony ofSA Bettencourt. 35 For example. PFC Manning stated. in reference to the State Department Cables. that ?it was forwarded to WL and god knows what happens now hopefully worldwide discussion. debates. and reforms I want people to see the regardless of who they are. .. because without information. you cannot make informed decisions as a public." 10 Ex. at 33. '3 Testimony Lirn. *7 NCD Valuation Documents, Bates a 00410556-60. 3" Testimony ot?SA Bettencourt. Continuation Sheet, no 457. vs. v. PFC Bradley E. The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C. 641 exists and that PFC Manning's conduct in stealing the database and converting WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 8 ofAdditional Charge ll. Additional Charge II, Speci?cation 9 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 79302)}: Lot-v In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following five elements: (1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 3 March 2010 and on or about 27 May 2010. the accused had unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense, to wit: more than three classi?ed records from a United States Southern Command database: (2) that the accused had reason to believe that the information he possessed could be used to the injury ofthe United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation: (3) that the accused willfully communicated. delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it: (4) that 18 U.S.C. section 793(c} exists; and (5) that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Facts The evidence showed that a user of PFC Manning?s primary and secondary SIPRNET computers searched for retention of interrogation videos. and during the month of November conducted over 700 searches using wget commands (which are used to download ?les from a web server) pertaining to Guantanamo Bay detainee suspects. The forensic examiner downloaded the same documents using the same program. and verified that those documents were the same documents on the WikiLeaks website by comparing them.89 The forensic examiner also found four complete .ITF Guantanamo Bay detainee assessments on PFC Manning?s primary SIPRNET computer under PFC Manning?s user pro?le??' Moreover. in his chats with Mr. Lamo. PFC Manning admitted providing these documents to WikiLeaks in the following statements: ?oh. the JTF GTMO Assange has those 100;? and. after Lamo said he read those papers and asked if Assange had ?[a]nything else interesting on his table". PFC Manning said. "idk don?t know] 1 only know what I provide himfm 3" Testimony ofSA Shaver. "0 Testimony of SA Shaver. Lamo Chat. IO Ex. 19(0). at 44. Continuation Sheet, DD 457. U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning The evidence showed there was no work related reason for PFC Manning to search for . 7 Guantanamo or Guantanamo detalnee assessments.}' The evidence showed that the terms or keywords ?Guantanamo? or were searched for from PFC Manning?s primary and secondary SIPRNET computers a total of 17 timest3 The evidence also showed that the wget command was used 793 times to download documents pertaining to Guantanamo detainees from PFC Manning's primary SIPRNET computer.g4 The evidence showed that on 3 March 2010. in an online chat with aliased to Nathaniel Frank at the time but later aliased to Julian Assange [editor of WiltiLealts).q5 PFC Manning made statements including: ?anyway. im throwing everything I got on JTF GTMO at you should take a while to get up tho summarvihistory/health conditionsfreasons for retaining or transfer of nearly every detainee have a that organizes the info as much as Additionally. the forensic examination Manning's personal computer Found evidence in Unallocated Clusters of multiple references to the WikiLeaks upload webpage. including a webpage containing a link to upload documents to WikiLeaks. and also references indicating a possible upload of the Farah records (see discussion of Additional Charge 11. Speci?cation ll]. below) to the WikiLeaks website.m These facts. taken together. support the conclusion that PFC Manning uploaded the Southern Command database to WikiLeaks. The evidence showed that between 24 April 20] and 21 June 201 WikiLeaks released 7'65 detainee assessment briefs. documents pertaining to detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Cubaqs PFC Manning?s comments in his chats with the person using the pressassociation screen name. later aliased as Julian Assange. indicate that he had reason to believe the infermation he provided concerning JTF GTMO detention memos could be used to the inj ury of the United States. In those chats. PFC Manning asked: "how valuable are JTF GT M0 detention memos containing summaries. background info. capture info. etc." and received the response. "quite valuable to the lawyers of these guys who are trying to get them out. where those memos suggest their innocencet?bad proceedure."qq PFC Manning had no need to access Guantanamo detainee assessments for hisjobdn? and he had no authorization to provide these records to WikiLeaks. who was not authorized to receive it. 92 Testimony Fulton; testimony Lim. "3 lntelink Log Files Forensic Report. Bates 003751 Iii-129. at s. "4 lntelink Log Files Forensic Report. Bates tr' 0 95 The evidence showed that a person using the user name was aliased as Nathaniel Frank from 22 February 20:0 to 25 March 2010. and as Julian Assange {editor ot?WikiLeaks) from May 2010 to 24 May 20l0. PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates ti 00124283?362. at 20-32. To. 9? PFC Manning's Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124283662. at 23. 9'1 PFC Manning's Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates a 00l24283-362. at 65-67, 77-78. 95 Testimony of SA Betteneourt. PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00l24283-362. at 22- Testimony Lint. 23 Continuation Sheet, DD Flo-rm 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Martan The evidence showed that there were more than three of these records'm and that they were properly classi?ed and remain classifiedw" The evidence showed that 18 793(e'} exists and that PFC Manning's conduct in providing these records to WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Specification 9 of Additional Charge ll. Additional Charge II, Speci?cation 10 (Art. 134, UCMJ: 18 U.S.C. 793(6): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: (1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 1 April 2010 and on or about 27 May 2010. the accused had unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense. to wit: more than five classi?ed records relating to a military operation in Farah Province. Afghanistan occurring on or about 4 May 2009; (2) that the accused had reason to believe that the information he possessed could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation; (3) that the accused willfully communicated. delivered, or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it: that 13 U.S.C. section 793(e) exists: and (5) that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces acts The evidence showed that a user of PFC Manning's user account on his primary SIPRN ET computer downloaded 135 ?les from a centcom.smil.mil server on 10 April 2010: shortly thereafter. after these files were viewed. the farah.zip ?le was viewed on 10 April 2010 on PFC Manning?s primary SIPRNET computer.?3 The evidence showed that a CD created on I 1 April 2010 at 9: 18 am containing a ?le named "farahzip" was accessed on PFC Manning?s personal computer.m Bates 00373123440. Classi?cation Review. Bates 0037864649. PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bales 003' 10374 ?1 at 53'53? PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124283662. at 49. 24 Continuation Sheet. no [Fa-m 457, vs. v. PFC Bradley s. Mannirt'g The evidence from Unallocated Clusters on PFC Manning?s personal computer indicated that seven ?les with names like "farahpartl .rar" had existed in a ?farah? folder on the desktop ofthat computer. The evidence also showed that at least four of these files had been uploaded to WikiLeaks after having been using the program. as they had the .nc ?le extension added an indicator of the use of that program?? Additionally. the examination of Unallocated Clusters on PFC Manning?s personal computer revealed that classi?ed documents relating to the operation in Farah Province, Afghanistan, on or about 4 May 2009 that were found on the centcomsmilmil server and also on PFC Manning's primary SIPRNET computer existed on his personal computer. The evidence showed that in a chat with Mr. Lamo. PFC Manning stated. in reSponse to Lanio?s question ?what do you consider the highlights" immediately following PFC Manning?s statement that he only knew what he provided to Mr. Assange. ?The Gharani airstrike videos and full report. lraq war event log. the ?Gitmo Papers.? and State Department cable database.?lm In the context ot?his discussion earlier in those chats concerning the State Department cables where he said. ?it was forwarded to WL and god knows what happens now hopefully worldwide discussion. debates. and reforms?? PFC Manning had reason to believe that the information in these documents could be used to the injury of the United States. PFC Manning had no need to access information concerning Afghanistan for his job.mg and he had no authorization to provide these documents to WikiLeaks. which was not authorized to receive it. ll? The evidence showed that there were more than ?ve of these records and that they were properly classi?ed and remain classified. The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C. 793(e} exists and that PFC Manning's conduct in providing these records to WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 10 ot?Additional Charge Additional Charge Speci?cation 1] (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 793(el): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 1 November 2009 and on or about 8 January 2010. the accused had unauthorized possession of PFC Meanings Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates at 00124233452. at 65-68. 1% PFC Manning's Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates UDI24283-362. at 54-58. Lamo Chat. to Exhibit at 44-45. Lento Chat. IO Es. 19(0). at 33. "m Testimony Lirn {stating PFC Manning had no need to access the CIDN E~Afghanistan database for his job). ?0 Bates at 00371425493. Classi?cation Review. Bates at 00376379302. Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457. U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning information relating to the national defense- to wit: a file named PAX.zip" containing a video named PAmev": that the acoused had reason to believe that the information he possessed could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation: 3) that the accused willfully communicated. delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it; that 13 U.S.C. section 793(c) exists: and that, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was ofa nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces Facts On 8 .lanuary 2010. WikiLeaks tweeted that they had a video ofthe Gharani airstrike video that was and asked for supercomputer time {presumably to it).1 '2 In his chats with Mr. Lame. PFC Manning acknowledged that Assange had this video in an format: ?they also caught wind that he [Assange] had a of the Gharani airstrike in Afghanistan. which he has. but hasn?t yet the production team was actually working on the Baghdad strike though. which was never really enerypted he's got the whole 15-6 for that incident so it wont just be video with no contest but its not nearly as it was an awful incident. but nothing like the baghdad one the investigating of?cers left the material unprotected, sitting in a director on a centcomsmilmil server but they did zip up the files, aes?256. with an excellent so afaik [as far as I know] it hasn?t been broken yet."i '3 Additionally. as mentioned above. PFC Manning stated that the "highlights" of what he provided to Mr. Assange included "the Gharani airstrike videos and full report.?I The evidence also showed that a computer owned by a Mr. Jason Katz. a former employee of the Department of Energy. contained a ?le named BE.zip_. and within that ?le was an password?protected file named BE 22 'PAX.wmv. The password the ferensic examiners obtained from ENTC OM to open the file by the same name on the centcom.smil.mil server also opened the file on Mr. Kate?s computer. and the files appeared to be the same. The ?le was placed on Mr. Katz?s computer on 15 December 2009 and Mr. Kata had installed a cracking program and was trying to the liltilh This evidence. particularly PFC Manning?s statements as to where the file was located and his knowledge that the files had been zipped "with an excellent password." together with the evidence indicating that PFC Manning had uploaded the farahzip ?les, circumstantially "3 Testimony of SA Bettencourt; Bates Lame Chat. [0 Ex. win), at tO-l 1. Lamo Chat, 10 Exhibit "5 Testimony of SA Shaver. Continuation Sheet. no 457, us. v. PFC Bradley E. Manni?h?g indicates that PFC Manning provided the BE 22 PAX.wmv file to WikiLeaks and that ?le was the one that was placed on Mr. Katz?s computer. The evidence showed that in the context of his chats with Mr. Lamo concerning the State Department cables where he said. ?it was forwarded to WL and god knows what happens now hopefully worldwide discussion. debatesa and reforms."] PFC Manning had reason to believe that the information in this video could be used to the injury of the United States. PFC Manning had no need to access information concerning Afghanian for hisjob.' and he had no authorization to provide these doCuments to WikiLeaks. which was not authorized to receive it. The evidence showed that this video was properly classi?ed and remains classified' '3 The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C. 793(e') exists and that PFC Manning's conduct in providing these records to WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service diserediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation ll of Additional Charge ll. Additional Charge Specification 12 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 641]: Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: (1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 28 March 2010 and on or about 4 May 2010? the accused voluntarily, intentionally and knowineg stole, purloined. or converted a thing of value. to wit: the Department of State Net-Centric Diplomacy database containing more than 250.000 records belonging to the United States government another: (2) that the thing of value belonged to the United States and had a value in excess of One Thousand Dollars that the accused did so with intent to deprive the owner of the use or bene?t of the thing of value so taken; (4) that 18 U.S.C. section 641 exists; and that, under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was ot?a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Lamo Chat, 10 Ex. 19(0). a: 33. 1? Testimony of CPT Lim (stating PFC Manning had no need to access the ClDNE-Afghanistan database for his job). Classi?cation Review? Bates a 27 Continuation Sheet, no 457,115.? PFC Bradley E. Mattan Facts The evidence showed that PFC Manning?s primary SIPRN ET computer contained, under his user pro?le. a ?le named ??leszip? in the ??bloop" folder that had over 10,000 Department of State cables in .html web page format. and that over 4,000 of these cables were classified. 1 '9 A CD accessed on PFC Manning?s personal computer containing ?leszip was burned on 4 May 10.12? The evidence showed that another document in the ?bloop'? folder. was a spreadsheet with cables published in March, April. and May 2010.1"zl The tab in this spreadsheet including cables published in March and April 2010 started with a cable with number 251,288. The evidence showed that PFC Manning?s primary SIPRNET computer had a version of wget (software used to download ?les from a server) that was the same version found in the Department ot?State log ?les, the Intelink log ?les. and that was downloaded on a NIPRNET computer by the bradleymanning user pro?le. '22 A user of PFC Manning?s user pro?le on that NIPRNET computer did Google searches for WikiLeaks and wget.exe on 3 May 2010 and downloaded wget to that pro?le. A user of PFC Manning?s user pro?le then transferred wget from the NIPRNET to SIPRNET on 4 May 2010, under PFC Manning?s user profile.123 The evidence showed that on 20 August 201 WikiLeaks released 251,287 Department of State cables in unredacted form and made them available on the lnternt?etd24 While the evidence was that Wild Leaks did not release the cables in the'?leszip folder?? the fOrensic examination found thousands of State Department cables in unallocated space on PFC Manning?s primary computer, ranging in classi?cation from unclassified to secret; many were complete, but many others were not.l?6 Additionally, the forensic examination of PFC Manning?s primary SIPRNET computer revealed that a deleted and partially overwritten file named ile?tbackupuarahzip" was originally created on 10 April 2010 and contained 582 Department of State Cables. over 250 of which were classi?ed?? The evidence showed the Department of State cables were in .csv format, a way of moving ?les from one database to another. and were Base64 encoded'28 Analysis Manning's secondary SIPRNET computer and his personal computer also showed many Department of State cables that had been converted to Base64 and stored in .csv Speci?cally, approximately 1 13.000 complete Department ot?State cables converted to Base64 were found in a deleted .csv ?le in Unallocated Clusters on PFC ?9 Testimony Shaver: PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates ti! 00211037-1 10. at 3 I. Testimony Shaver. PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report, Bates 0021 1037?! 10, at 31; spreadsheet. at Bates 00296932; Testimony of SA Shaver. '33 PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates 0021 103 10- at 37. '33 Testimony of SA Shaver. '24 Testimony of SA Bettencourt; Testimony ofSA Shaver. '35 Testimony of SA Shaver. SA Shaver also testi?ed there was a problem with ?leszip when it was created, and if a person using WinZip tried to open it. it would not open because it was a corrupted tile. and one would need special tools to open the ?les in fileszip. Based on that testimony, it appears that WikiLeaks did not release the cables in l'iles.aip because they could not open them. 12" Testimony of SA Shaver. PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report, Bates it 0021 10374 10. at 34-36- ?23 Testimony of SA Shaver. '39 PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates 0021 1037410. at 36. 28 Continuation Sheet, DD F-drm 457, US. v. PFC Bradley E. Mannidg Manning?s secondary SIPRNET computeer and evidence of Department of State cables published before March 2010 were found in Unallocated Clusters on PFC Manning's personal computer. including data appearing to have a .csv ?le structure listing Department of State cables with numbers preceding 251.28? in a format similar to the cables found on PFC Manning?s primary SIPRNET Computer. Additionally. examination of Department of State cable message record numbers released by WikiLeal-ts identi?ed 251,298 individual message record numbers: examination of PFC Manning?s personal computer and his primary and secondary SIPRNET computers showed that they contained 83% of all the message record numbers released to WikiLeaks. '33 This evidence, taken together, leads to a conclusion that the 251,287 ?les released by WikiLeaks were provided to WikiLeaks by PFC Manning. The evidence showed that in his chats with Mr. Lamo concerning the State Department cables. PFC Manning said, ?it was forwarded to WL and god knows what happens now hopefully worldwide discussion. debates, and reforms I want people to see the regardless of who they because without information. you cannot make informed decisions as a public.?33 which indicates that that he converted this database another in that he wanted to make this information public and thus deprive its owner. the United States, of its use or bene?t. While there was evidence that PFC Manning had the authority to access diplomatic cables for his job.I34 he had no authorization to take this database from its owner and thus his taking it constituted stealing it. The evidence showed that the valuation of the Net-Centric Diplomacy database was over $4 million. The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C. 64] exists and that PFC Manning?s conduct in stealing the database and converting WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and was service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Specification 12 of Additional Charge ll. Additional Charge Speci?cation 13 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(l)): Lott] In order to prove this offense. the govermnent must establish the following six elements: n" PFC Manning's Secondary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00199494607. at l. 1244. PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00124233662. at 51-54. Files Forensic Report. Bares 0005432064. at I4. "13 Lamo Chat. [0 Ex. at 33. Testimony Lim (stating he gave the link through email to access diplomatic cables). ?5 NCD Valuation Documents. Bates 004 29 Continuation Sheet. no ?rm 457. as. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 28 March 2010 and on or about 2? May 2010. the accused knowingly exceeded authorized access on a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network computer; (2) that the accused obtained information that has been determined by the United States government by Executive Order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations. to wit: more than seventy-five classi?ed United States Department of State cables; that the accused had reason to believe that the information he obtained could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation; (4) that the accused willfully communicated delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it: (5) that IS U.S.C. section and that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring disoredit upon the armed forces.? Facts The evidence showed that PFC Manning?s primary SIPRN ET computer contained. under his user pro?le. a ?le named ??leszip? in the "bloop? folder that had over 10.000 Departmentjof' State cables in .html web page format. and that over 4.000 of these cables were classi?ed. A CD accessed on PFC Manning?s personal computer containing ?leszip was burned on 4 May 10. '33 The evidence showed that another document in the ?bloop? folder. was a spreadsheet with cables published in March. April. and May 2010"?) The tab in this spreadsheet including cables published in March and April 2010 started with a cable with number 251.288. The evidence showed that PFC Manning?s primary computer had a version of wget (software used to download ?les from a server) that was the same version found in the Department of State log ?les. the lntelink log ?les. and that was downloaded on a NIPRNET computer by a user of PFC Manning?s user profile.?40 A user of PFC Manning's user pro?le on that NIPRNET computer did Google searches for WikiLeaks and wgetexe on 3 May 10 and downloaded wget to that pro?le. A user of PFC Manning?s user pro?le then transferred wget from the NIPRNET to SIPRNET on 4 May 2010. under PFC Manning?s user pro?lem 13? These elements are a tailored version of Eighth Circuit Model Jury Instruction 6.18.1030A. Testimony of SA Shaver: PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 002! 1037-] 10. at 31. ?3 Testimony ofSA Shaver. "19 PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates a 002] l037-1 at 3 spreadsheet. at Bates 00296982: Testimony ofSA Shaver. PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates a? 0021 1037-l 10. at 37. Testimony ofSA Shaver. Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457. US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning The evidence showed that on 20 August 2011. WikiLeaks released 251.287 Department of State cables in unredacted form and made them available on the Internet?: While the evidence was that WikiLeaks did not release the cables in the tileszip folder.I43 the forensic examination found thousands of State Department cables in unallocated space on PFC Manning?s primary SIPRNET computer. ranging in classification from unclassified to secret; many were complete, but many others were not.l '4 Additionally. the forensic examination Manning's primary SIPRNET computer revealed that a deleted and partially overwritten ?le named "etiLost Filelbackuplfarahzip" was originally created on 10 April 2010 and contained 582 Department of State Cables. over 250 of which were classi?ed.MS The evidence showed the Department of State cables were in .csv format. a way of moving ?les from one database to another. and were Base64 encoded."m Analysis of PFC Manning's secondary SIPRNET computer and his personal computer also showed many Department of State cables that had been converted to Base64 and stored in .csv format?? Speci?cally. approximately 1 13.000 complete Department of State cables converted to Base64 were found in a deleted .csv file in Unallocated Clusters on PFC Manning's secondary SIPRNET computerfw? and evidence of Department of State cables published before March 2010 were found in Unallocated Clusters on PFC Manning?s personal computer. including data appearing to have a .csv file structure listing Department of State cables with numbers preceding 251.287r in a format similar to the cables found on PFC Manning?s primary SIPRN ET Computer?? Additionally. examination of Department of State cable message record numbers released by WikiLeaks identi?ed 251.298 individual message record numbers; examination of PFC Manning?s personal computer and his primary and secondary SIPRNET computers showed that they contained 83% ofall the message record numbers released to WikiLealts. This evidence. taken together. leads to a conclusion that the 251.28? ?les released by WikiLeaks were provided to WikiLeaks by PFC Manning. The evidence showed that in his chats with Mr. Lamo concerning the State Department cables. PFC Manning said, "it was forwarded to WL and god knows what happens now hopefully worldwide discussion. debates. and reforms i want people to see the regardless of who they because without information. you cannot make informed decisions as a publicfm which indicates that that he had reason to believe that the information he obtained could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation. '42 Testimony of SA Bettencourt: Testimony of SA Shaver. "3 Testimony ot'SA Shaver. SA Shaver also testi?ed there was a problem with ?leszip when it was created. and if a person using WinZip tried to open it. it would not open because it was a corrupted file. and one would need special tools to open the ?les in tileszip. Based on that testimony. it appears that WikiLeaks did not release the cables in files.zip because they could not open them. '44 Testimony ofSA Shaver. ?5 PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRN ET Computer Forensic Report. Bates at 002 I 1037-1 l0. at 34?36. ?6 Testimony ot?SA Shaver. ?7 PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRN ET Computer Forensic Report. Bates 0021 1037-1 10. at 36. PFC Manning?s Secondary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00199494-507. at 1. l2-l4. "9 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates 0012-4283-3452. at 51-54. Files Forensic Report. Bates if 0005432034. at 14. Lamo Chat. [0 Es. 19(0). at 33. Continuation Sheet. DD Form 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Mannihg While there was evidence that PFC Manning had the authority to access diplomatic cables for his job,I52 the context of that evidence was that access was authorized for the to do theirjob. The evidence also showed that before logging on to his primary and secondary SIPRNET computers. PFC Manning had to click on a warning banner. the first sentence of which read. ?You are accessing a US. Government (USG) information System US) that is provided for USS-authorized use only?"53 Accordingly. accessing diplomatic cables in order to provide them to a person not entitled to receive it exceeded authorized access. PFC Manning had no authorization to transfer this information to WikiLeal-ts. which was not entitled to receive it. The evidence showed that these cables were properly classi?ed and remain classi?ed]S4 The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C. 1030( 1] exists and that PFC Manning?s conduct in providing these classified cables to WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and was service discrediting. Additional Charge 11, Speci?cation 14 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. Law in order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following six elements: that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 15 February 2010 and on or about 18 February 2010. the accused knowingly exceeded authorized access on a Secret lnternet Protocol Router Network computer; (2) that the accused obtained information that has been determined by the United States government by Executive Order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations. to wit: a classi?ed United States Department of State cable titled ?Reykjavik-13"; (3) that the accused had reason to believe that the information he obtained could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation: (4) that the accused willfully communicated. delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it: (5) that 18 U.S.C. section 1030(all exists: and that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. '53 Testimony of CPT Lim {stating he gave the link through email to access diplomatic cables]. ?53 Testimony ofSA Shaver: ID Es. at 1 (Bates newness). Classi?cation Review, Bates a {10376903-53. LIJ Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457, US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning Facts The evidence showed that the keyword "Iceland" was searched for a total of fourteen times from both of PFC Manning?s primary and secondary SIPRNET computers. '55 The ?rst search for iceland was on 9 January 2010 and came from PFC Manning?s profile.156 The evidence also showed that PFC Manning accessed a CD created on 15 February 2010 at 6:21 am containing the ?le. UReykjaviktht? on his personal computerd? The evidence also showed that WikiLeaks released ReykjaviktlS on 18 February 2010.?13 Additionally, the evidence showed that when Mr. Lamo asked for ?bona ?des? during their chats, during the discussion of the State Cables, PFC Manning stated. "this one was a test: Classi?ed cable from US Embassy Reykjavik on Icesave dated 13 Jan 2010 .. the result of that one was that the icelandic ambassador to the US was recalled. and ?red that?sjust one cable??9 This evidence. taken together, leads to a conclusion that the Reykjavik-l 3 cable was provided to WikiLeaks by PFC Manning. The evidence showed that in his chats with Mr. Lamo concerning the State Department cables. PFC Manning said, ?Hilary Clinton. and several thousand diplomats around the werld are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and finds an entire repository of classi?ed foreign policy is available. in searehable format to the public theres so it affects everybody on everywhere there's a US there?s a diplomatic scandal that will be Iceland, the Vatican. Spain. Brazil. Madagascar. if its a country. and its recognized by the US as a country. its got dirt on it its open worldwide anarchy in CSV format. . and ?it was forwarded to WL and god knows what happens now hopefully worldwide discussion. debates, and reforms I want people to see the regardless of who they because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a which indicates that that he had reason to believe that the information he obtained could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage ofany foreign nation. While there was evidence that PFC Manning had the authority to access diplomatic cables for his job.'62 the context of that evidence was that access was authorized for the to do theirjob. The evidence also showed that before logging on to his primary and secondary SIPRNET computers. PFC Manning had to click on a warning banner. the first sentence of which read, ?You are accessing a U.S. Govermnent (USO) Information System (IS) that is provided for USO-authorized use Accordingly. accessing diplomatic cables in order to provide them to a person not entitled to receive it exceeded authorized access. PFC Manning had no authorization to transfer this information to WikiLeaks, which was not entitled to receive it. '55 lntelink Logs Forensic Report. Bates is 003751 16-129. at 8. Testimony of SA Shaver. '57 PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report, Bates t?t 00124233-362. at 49. '53 Testimony of SA Bettencourt; PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report, Bates #1 00124283662. at Attachment 3 {Carved_l55659_l 12253792254_l Lame Chat. to ES. at 9. Lamo Chat. 10 Ex. rain). at s. Lamo Chat. 10 Ex. 19:13). at 33. Testimony Lim (stating he gave the link through email to access diplomatic cables). Testimony ofSA Shaver; 10 Ex. tits). at I (Bates a 00376856). 33 Continuation Sheet, DD 457, v. PFC Bradley E. Manning The evidence showed that this cable was properly classi?ed and remains classi?ed.? The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C. 1030(ait?l} exists and that PFC Mamiing?s conduct in providing this classified cable to WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and was service discrediting. Additional Charge 11. Speci?cation 15 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 793(e)): eri In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following ?ve elements: 1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer, Iraq, between on or about 15 February 2010 and on or about 15 March 2010. the accused had unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense, to wit: a classi?ed record produced by a United States Army intelligence organiZation, dated 18 March 2003: that the accused had reason to believe that the information he possessed could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation; (3) that the accused willfully communicated. delivered. or transmitted the said information to a person not entitled to receive it; (4) that 18 USC. section 793(e) exists; and (5) that. under the circumstances, the conduct ofthe accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Facts The evidence showed that "between [the document at issue] was accessed only 12 times; 4 of the 12 accesses during that period were attributed to IP addresses assigned to PFC Manning?s SIPRNET The evidence showed that the classified record produced by a United States Army intelligence organization copied from the SIPRNET contained the same content as the document that was posted to WikiLeaks on 15 March 2010.? The evidence showed that in a chat with (aliased at the time to Nathaniel Frank but later to Julian Assange), the accused discussed this report. stating: YT article has LTC Packnetl allegedly Classi?cation Review. Bates ii 003%903-53. Army Intelligence Forensic Report. Bates it 004645166, at 1 I. Army Intelligence Forensic Report, Bates 0046452-66, at 5-7 (the date oflhe document at issue is contained in that Report); Testimony ot?SA Bertencourt. 34 Continuation Sheet, DD [Farm 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning con?rming the authenticityr of the 2008 report posted on The Early Bird the same da of that chat, 18 March 2010, had an article from the New York Times discussing that report.1h The contents of the document at issue indicate that PFC Manning had reason to believe that the information in this document could be used to the injury of the United States. PFC Manning had no need to access information concerning WikiLeaks for hisjobd?g and he had no authorization to provide this document to WikiLeaks. which was not authorized to receive it. The evidence showed that this document was properly classi?ed and remains classi?ed. The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C- 793(e'} exists and that PFC Manning's conduct in providing this document to WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and was service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 15 ot?Additional Charge Additional Charge ll, Speci?cation 16 (Art. 134, 18 U.S.C. 641): Law In order to prove this offense, the government must establish the following ?ve elements: (1) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 11 May 3010 and on or about 27 May 2010, the accused voluntarily. intentionally and knowingly stole, purloined. or converted a thing of value, to wit: the United States Forces Iraq Microso? Outlookaharepoint Exchange Server global address list belonging to the United States government another; (2) that the thing of value belonged to the United States and had a value in excess of One Thoosand Dollars (3) that the accused did so with intent to deprive the owner ot?the use or benefit ofthe thing of value so taken: (4) that IS U.S.C. section 641 exists: and that. under the circumstances. the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces and was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Facts '67 PFC Manning Personal Computer Forensic Report- Bates it 124283-362. at 3 I: Army Intelligence Forensic Report, Bates it 004645266. at 10-] l. IO Es. 1 HP). p. 20-21. Testimony Lim. Classi?cation Review. Bates it 0041063364. Lu U1 Continuation Sheet, DD ?rm 457.. U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning The evidence showed that on 7? May 2010. WikiLeaks tweeted a request seeking as many mail addresses as possiblem The evidence showed that the Supply Annex NIPRN ET Computer to which PFC Manning had access contained a large text ?le named ?blahtxt? appearing to be an extract of an Exchange global address list in the peter.bigelow user account. and that based on the analysis of PFC Manning?s personal computer and primary SIPRNET computer. ?blah? appeared to be a ?le name that PFC Manning commonly used?: The evidence showed that the ?le creation dates for the ?les related to the global address list on the Supply Annex NIPRNET computer were 13 May and 22 May 10'? The evidence also showed that the temporary internet ?les of 830 Peter Bigelow?s user account contained searches for how to obtain a global address list from Microsoft Outlook.1M The evidence showed that the Supply Annex NIPRNET computer did not require CAC logon. so the. forensic analysis was unable to determine whether SSG Bigelow created the global access list ?les or if PFC Manning used his account.175 However. the recycle bin for $86 Bigelow?s account contained documents related to PFC Manning. such as a copy of his Article 15. counseling statements. and other documents!? and the temporary internet ?les on 888 Bigelow?s account included an amazoncom checkout page indicating that the item purchased would be sent to PFC Manning at an address in Potomac. Maryland. and included evidence of Google searches for WikiLeaks and Julian Assange,m and the Google search page login user was PFC Manning?s G-mail account.?1 all of which indicates that PFC Manning was using 880 Bigelow's account. The evidence showed that PFC Manning?s personal computer contained. in unallocated clusters. a test fragment showing intent to ?acquire and ex?ltrate Global Address List from United States Forces Iraq Microsoft Outlook t? Sharepoint Exchange Server.? and also contained an extracted portion of an Exchange global address list. which led the examiner to conclude ?it seems likely PFC MANNING completed the 'task" identi?ed above."m The global address list would be helpful for the enemy to possess in that it would enable the enemy to engage in ?spear?shing.? a targeted attempt to gain information from an unauspecting source by masquerading as someone the source trusts; speci?c information such as knowledge of full names and emails facilitates spear?shing because it is more likely to make the targeted source believe the spear?sher is legitimate.l 0 PFC Manning?s searching for the global address list and how to ex?ltrate it shortly after WikiLeaks tweeted asking for as many .mil address as possible indicates that that be converted the global address list another in that he wanted to make this Bates 00410594-95. 1? Supply Annex NIPRNET Computer Forensic Report, Bates tr 0019-9556-90. at l. Supply Annex NIPRN ET Computer Forensic Report. Bates r?t' 0019955630. at 13. Supply Annex NIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates rt 00199556-90. at 29-32. '75 Supply Annex NIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates rt 00 99556-90. at 12. Supply Annen Computer Forensic Report. Bates tr 00l99556-90. at 17. ?7 Supply Annex NIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates tr 00199556-90. at 2 .22. 27-29. ?73 Testimony ofSA Williamson. PFC Manning's Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00124233462. at 64-65. Testimony ot?SA Bettencourt. 36 Continuation Sheet, DD ?rm 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradleyr E. Manning information public by giving it to WikiLeaks and thus deprive its owner. the United States. of its use or benefitm PFC Manning had no authorization to take the global address list from its owner and thus his taking it constituted stealing it. While there was no direct evidence provided of the value of the global address list. there was evidence provided that the valuation of the Net-Centric Diplomacy database was over $4 million.lg There was also evidence provided that the value of the information WikiLeaks possessed was 12 million pounds. or between $15-20 million]33 This circumstantial evidence supports a conclusion that the value of the global address list was over 1.000. The evidence showed that 18 U.S.C. 641 exists and that PFC Manning?s conduct in stealing the global address list and converting WikiLeaks was prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discrediting. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 16 of Additional Charge Additional Charge Speci?cation 1 (Art. 92, UCMJ): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the Following three elements: 1) that there was in existence a certain lawful general regulation in the following terms: paragraph 4-Stajt4). Army Regulation 25-2. dated 24 October 2007. which provides: "the following activities are specifically prohibited by any authorized user on a Government provided IS or connection: Attempts to strain. test. circumvent. or bypass network or 18 security mechanisms. or to perform network or keystroke monitoring. RCERTS, Red Team, or other of?cial activities. operating in their of?cial capacities only. may be exempted from this requirement": that the accused had a duty to obey such regulation; and that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 1 November 2009 and on or about 8 March 2010. the accused violated this lawful general regulation by attempting to bypass network or information system security mechanisms. Facts For example, PFC Manning stated. in reference to the State Department Cables. that ?it was forwarded to Wt. and god knows what happens now hopefully worldwide discussion, debates. and reforms i want people to see the regardless of who they because without information- you cannot make informed decisions as a ubiic." [0 Es. th?D}. at33. 33 nco valuation Documents. Bates a 004 0556-60. Testimony ofSA Benencom. Continuation Sheet. DD ?rm 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Marran Examination of PFC. Manning?s secondary SIPRNET computer revealed a text string that he had provided to (aliased at the time to Nathaniel Frank but later to Julian Assange) in a deleted chat session found on his personal computer in that chat which occurred on 8 March 2010. PFC Manning asked. "any good at 1m has cracking," provided the text string, and said ?i had to hexadump a SAM ?le. since i don"t have the system The evidence also showed that PFC Manning attempted to obtain the password ofthe FTPUSER account on his secondary SIPRNET computer. which could have been used to attempt to hide his true identity while using that computer.1 Given the extent of his conduct described in this report, it is reasonable to conclude that PFC Manning attempted to find a way to hide his activity while engaging in that conduct. The evidence showed the regulation at issue existed and PFC Manning had a duty to obey it. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 1 ofAdditional Charge Ill. Additional Charge Ill, Speci?cation 2 (Art. 92, UCMJ): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following three elements: that there was in existence a certain lawful general regulation in the following terms: paragraph Army Regulation 25-2. dated 34 October 2007. which provides: ?the following activities are specifically prohibited by any authorized user on a Government provided IS 0r connection: Modi?cation of the IS or software. use of it in any manner other than its intended purpose. or adding user-configurable or unauthorized software such as. but not limited to. commercial instant messaging. commercial Internet chat. collaborative environments. or peer- to-peer client applications. These applications create exploitable vulnerabilities and circumvent normal means of securing and monitoring network activityr and provide a vector for the introduction of malicious code. remote access. network intrusions or the es?ltration of protected data?: (2) that the accused had a duty to obe}F such regulation; and (3) that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. between on or about 1 1 February 2010 and on or about 3 April 2010. the accused violated this lawful general regulation by adding unauthorized software to a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network Computer. Facts PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 00124233662. at 25 (the forensic examiner noted that ?the terminology hash cracking? and ?hexadumping a SAM ?le' are techniques used for gaining unauthorized access to a Windows-based computer by breaking the login password"); PFC Manning?s Secondary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates a 00199494607. at 9. '85 PFC Manning's Secondary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00l99494-j??t. at 940. 38 Continuation Sheet. DD ?rm 457. US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manniu-ig The evidence showed that the wget command was used to download documents pertaining to Guantanamo Bay detainees from PFC Manning?s primary SIPRNET In order for wget to have been used. it must have been installed. The evidence showed that wget was not authorized softwarem The evidence showed the regulation at issue existed and PFC Manning had a duty to obey it. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 2 of Additional Charge Additional Charge Speci?cation 3 (Art. 92, UCMJ): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following three elements: (I) that there was in existence a certain lawful general regulation in the following terms: paragraph Army Regulation 25-2. dated 24 October 2007'. which provides: ?the following activities are specifically prohibited by any authorized user on a Government provided IS or connection: Modification of the IS or software. use of it in any manner other than its intended purpose, or adding user-con?gurable or unauthorized software such as. but not limited to . commercial instant messaging. commercial Internet chat. collaborative environments. or peer-to-peer client applications. These applications create exploitable vulnerabilities and circumvent normal means of securing and monitoring network activity and provide a vector for the introduction of malicious code. remote access. network intrusions or the ex?ltration of protected data": that the accused had a duty to obey such regulation; and that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq. on or about 4 May 2010. the accused violated this lawful general regulation by adding unauthorized software to a Secret Internet Protocol Router Network Computer. Facts The evidence showed that PFC Manning's primary SIPRNET computer had a version of wget (software used to download ?les from a server) that was the same version found in the Department of State log files, the lntelink log ?les. and that was downloaded by the bradleymanning user pro?le on a NIPRNET computer)? A user of PFC Manning?s user profile on that NIPRNET computer did Google searches for WikiLeaks and wgetexe on 3 May 10 and 13" lntelink Logs Forensic Report. Bates it 00375] 16-139. at 12 (this document includes examples of dates of such use of ?gen. '37 Testimony of CPT Cherepko. PFC Manning?s Primary SIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 0021 1031-1 It]. at 37. 39 Continuation Sheet, DD form 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning downloaded wget to that profile. A user of PFC Manning?s user pro?le then transferred from the NIPRNET to SIPRNET on 4 May 2010. under PFC Manning's user pro?le. '39 The evidence showed that wget was not authorized software. "m The evidence showed the regulation at issue existed and PFC Manning had a duty to obey it. i thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 3 of Additional Charge Additional Charge Ill, Speci?cation 4 (Art. 92, UCMJ): Law In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following three elements: (1 that there was in existence a certain lawful general regulation in the following terms: paragraph Army Regulation 25-2, dated 24 October 2007. which provides: ?the following activities are specifically prohibited by any authorized user on a Government provided IS or connection: Modi?cation of the IS or software. use of it in any manner other than its intended purpose, or adding user-con?gurable or unauthorized software such as, but not limited to . commercial instant messaging. commercial Internet chat. collaborative environments, or peer-to?peer client applications. These applications create exploitable vulnerabilities and circumvent normal means of securing and monitoring network activity and provide a vector for the introduction of malicious code. remote access. network intrusions or the of protected data?; that the accused had a duty to obey such regulation: and that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq, between on or about 11 May 2010 and on or about 27 May 2010, the accused violated this lawful general regulation by using an information system in a manner other than its intended purpose. Facts The evidence showed that on 7' May 2010. WikiLeaks tweeted a request seeking as many .mil addresses as possible!? The evidence showed that the Supply Annex NIPRNET Computer to which PFC Manning had access contained a large text file named "blahtxt" appearing to be an extract of an Exchange global address list in the peter.bigelow user account. and that based on the analysis of PFC Manning?s personal computer and primary SIPRNET computer. ?blah? appeared to be a file name that PFC Manning commonly used.192 The evidence showed that the ?le creation dates for the files related to the global address list on the Supply Annex NIPRNET 1? Testimony ot'SA Shaver. Testimony Chercpko. Bates it 0041059435. Supply Annex NIPRN ET Computer Forensic Report. Bates no masses-so. at I. 40 Continuation Sheet, DD ?rm 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning computer were 13 May and 22 May 2010.193 The evidence also showed that the temporary internet ?les of SSG Bigelow?s user account contained searches for how to obtain a global address list from Microsoft Outlook. '94 The evidence showed that the Supply Annex NIPRNET computer did not require CAC logon. so the forensic analysis was unable to determine whether SSG Bigelow created the global access list ?les or if PFC Manning used his accountng However, the recycle bin for 886 Bigelow?s account contained documents related to PFC Manning, such as a copy of his Article 15, counseling statements, and other documentsm and the temporary internet files on SSG Bigelow?s account included an amazoncom checkout page indicating that the item purchased would be sent to PFC Manning at an address in Potomac. Maryland. and included evidence of Google searches for WikiLeaks and Julian Assangefgl and the Google search page login user was PFC Manning?s G-mail all of which indicates that PFC Manning was using 336 Bigelow?s account. The evidence showed that PFC Manning?s personal computer contained, in unallocated clusters, a text fragment showing intent to "acquire and extiltrate Global Address List from United States Forces Iraq Microsoft Outlook Sharepoint Exchange Server," and also contained an extracted portion of an Exchange global address list. which led the examiner to conclude "it seems likely PFC MANNING completed the 'task? identi?ed abovefdgq PFC Manning?s searching for the global address list and how to ex?ltrate it shortly after WikiLeaks tweeted asking for as many .mil address as possible indicates that that he used the Supply Annex NIPRNET computer for a other than its intended purpose by obtaining the global access list. The evidence showed the regulation at issue existed and PFC Manning had a duty to obey it. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 4 of Additional Charge 111. Additional Charge Speci?cation 5 (Art. 92, UCMJ): Lori-ii In order to prove this offense. the government must establish the following three elements: (I) that there was in existence a certain law?il general regulation in the following terms: paragraph 7-4, Army Regulation 380-5. dated 29 September 2000, which provides, in relevant Supply Annex NIPRN ET Computer Forensic Report, Bates 00199556490, at l3. Supply Annex NIPRN ET Computer Forensic Report. Bates it 0019955630. at 20-32. '95 Supply Annex NIPRN ET Computer Forensic Report. Bates 0019955630. at 12. Supply Annex NIPRNET Compmer Forensic Report. Bates it 00199556-90. at I7. Supply Annex NIPRNET Computer Forensic Report. Bates 00i99555-90. at alas. 27-29. ?is Testimony of SA Williamson. PFC Manning?s Personal Computer Forensic Report, Bates 00124283662. at 64-65. 4i Continuation Sheet, no ?rm 457, vs. v. are Bradley E. Mann?g part: "Classified information that is not under the personal control and observation of an authorized person. is to be guarded or stored in a locked security container, vault, room, or area, pursuant to the level of classi?cation and this regulation by one or more of the following methods: SECRET information will be stored in the same manner as prescribed for TOP SECRET [in a GSA-approved security container with one of the listed supplemental controls or in a vault or security room] in a GSA-approved security container without Supplemental controls CONFIDENTIAL information will be stored in the same manner as prescribed for TOP SECRET and SECRET information except that supplemental controls are not required?; that the accused had a duty to obey such regulation: and that at or near Contingency Operating Station Hammer. Iraq, on divers occasions between on or about 1 November 2009 and on or about 2? May 2010, the accusod violated this lawful general regulation by wrongfully storing classified information. Facts As outlined in this report, the evidence showed that throughout. PFC Manning brought CD5 with classi?ed information on them and accessed them on his personal computer, and showed that his personal computer contained classi?ed information. There was no evidence that the personal computer c?gtaining classi?ed information was stored in an approved manner as required by the regulation. The evidence showed the regulation at issue existed and PFC Manning had a duty to obey it. I thus conclude that reasonable grounds exist to believe that PFC Manning committed the offense alleged in Speci?cation 5 of Additional Charge [11. II. Analysis of Matters Raised by the Accused Overcharging by the Government The defense argued that Additional Charge 1 and its Specification, Specification 1 of Additional Charge 11. and all ?ve Speci?cations of Additional Charge should be dismissed. The defense also argued that the remaining Speci?cations of Additional Charge 11 shoold be consolidated into one Speci?cation alleging violations of 18 U.S.C. section 641, one Speci?cation alleging violations of 18 U.S.C . section 793(e). and one Speci?cation alleging violations of 18 U.S.C. section if the charged offenses were either dismissed or consolidated as sought by the defense. PFC Manning would face a maximum penalty of 30 years. As outlined above. there are reasonable grounds to believe that PFC Manning committed the offenses alleged in Additional Charge and its Specification and in Additional Charge Speci?cation 1. These are serious charges. but so too is the offense conduct they allege. Note that 1 do not believe that PFC Manning?s storage ofthe CD marked 12 JUL 07 C2 ENGAGEMENT ZONE 30 CC, with a sticker attached. in his quarters constitutes a violation ofthis regulation as there was no evidence that the video contained on that CD was in fact classi?ed. 42 Continuation Sheet. DD farm 457. US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning Moreover. the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces recently found that an Article 134 offense alleging wrongfully providing information about the US. military to persons the accused thought were members of Al-Qaida was not multiplicious with attempted violations of Article 104. including attempting to give intelligence to the enemy. U. S. v. Anderson. 68 MJ. 378. 384-85 (C.A.A.F. 20 0). Accordingly. it would be inappropriate to recommend that these charges be dismissed. With respect to the remaining Speci?cations of Additional Charge charged under Article 134 as violations of 18 U.S.C. section 641. 8 violations of 18 U.S.C. 793(e). and 2 violations of 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(l) (all also including charging the relevant conduct as prejudicial to good order and discipline and service discreditingl. each speci?cation charges a separate and distinct criminal act occurring at different times or involving different information. As Anderson stated, for multiplicity analysis "the applicable rule is that. where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions. the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one. is whether each provision reqoires proof of a fact which the other does not." Anderson. 68 MJ. at 385 (quoting v. United States. 284 US. 299. 304 (1932)). A review of the elements of the speci?cations in Additional Charge ll alleging violations of 18 U.S.C.. sections 793(e). 641. and 1) indicates that each of these statutes requires ?proof of a fact which the others do not." For example. the section 793te) offenses require proof that the accused had unauthorized possession of information relating to the national defense. while the section offenses require proof that the accused exceeded authorized access on a computer and also obtained information that has been determined by the United States government to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations. Accordingly. even though these offenses have two elements in common (having reason to believe that the information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation. and willfully communicating the infomtation to a person not entitled to receive it), the offenses are not multiplicious. Similarly. the section 641 offenses are not multiplicious with the section 793(e) and section '1 offenses because the section 641 elements require proof of different facts than do the elements of the other offenses. As to whether any of the Speci?cations 2-16 of Additional Charge ll constitute an unreasonable multiplication of charges. the Specifications allege separate criminal transactions involving different time periods and different information. For example. one of the two Speci?cations alleging violations of 18 U.S.C.. section 1030(al(1) (Specification 13) alleges conduct between on or about 28 Mar 10 and on or about 27 May 10 involving more than 75 classi?ed Department of State cables. while the other Speci?cation 141 alleges conduct between on or about involving one particular Department of State cable. An analysis of the other Speci?cations of Additional Charge [1 charging violations of the same statute leads to the same conclusion?? 30' Note that in those cases where the dates of the Speci?cations in Additional Charge 11 overlap (13 7'93 violations: Speci?cations 2 and 3; Speci?cations 5 and 7: Speci?cations 2. 3. and 0; Speci?cations 9 and 10; Speci?cations 3. 9 and 15: and I8 USC 641 violations: Speci?cations 4 and the information that is the subject of the charged offense is separate and distinct. indicating that the criminal act charged in each specification is separate and distinct. 43 Continuation Sheet, DD ?rm 457, US. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning Anderson cites the ?ve part test used to determine whether there is unreasonable multiplication of charges omitting the first factor. which simply asks whether the accused objected at trial. the test asks. ?Is each charge and speci?cation aimed at separate criminal acts? Does the number of charges and speci?cations misrepresent or exaggerate the [accused's] criminality? Does the number ofcharges and speci?cations unfairly increase the [accused's] punitive exposure? [and] Is there any evidence of prosecutorial overreaching or abuse in the drafting of the charges?" Anderson. 68 MJ. at 386 (emphasis in original; quoting US. v. Quiroz, 55 MJ. 334. 338 2001)). As outlined above. here each charge and speci?cation is aimed at a separate criminal act. and thus I do not believe the number of charges and speci?cations misrepresents or exaggerates PFC Manning?s criminality. As to whether the number of charges and speci?cations unfairly increases his punitive exposure. the Anderson court?s reasoning is instructive: ?[Anderson?s] punitive exposure was not increased, because a conviction on any one of the Articles 80. UCMJ, offenses had a maximum punishment of life con?nement; and the Government could easily have broken up the speci?cations as drafted into multiple different speci?cations based on speci?c contacts. e-mails, lntemet postings. etc." Id. Given the maximum penalty under Additional Charge 1 and its Speci?cation. PFC Manning?s punitive exposure is similarly not unfairly increased here. Finally. there was no evidence of prosecutorial abuse or overreach in the drafting of the charges. As a result. I do not believe the charges and speci?cations constitute an unreasonable multiplication ofcharges. As to the Speci?cations of Additional Charge the evidence showed that it was common for soldiers to lay music and games and to watch movies on computers in the at FOB Hammett-m? There was also evidence that it was not uncommon to add software to those computers. such as Chat.?203 However. the evidence also showed that there was a mission-related reason for the addition of MIRC Chat. as used it to chat with the aviation community concerning their work.204 and even for listening to music. as it helped reduce stress and helped the perfomi their duties more effectively.MS In contrast. there was no evidence showing there was a mission-related reason to add the software wget to these computers, nor was there evidence showing there was a mission-related reason for PFC Marming?s other conduct alleged in these Speci?cations. Moreover. whether or not other software such as Chat was added to the computers. or whether or not games. music. or movies was played on the computers. the basis for these charges is not that PFC Manning added such other software or played games. music. or movies on these computers. Quite the contrary - Testimony of CPT Fulton (saw soldiers listen to music in the SCIF. it was common for them to transfer music from the SIPRNET to another network. no one ever told her that music on the SIPRNET was a violation of information assurance security procedures. and soldiers would watch movies and play games on their workstations); Testimony of SGT Padgett (they were told music was authorized in the SCIF and there was music and also games on the shared drive on the SIPRNET terminals; movies were allowed. but only on the unclassi?ed computers}. 3?3 Testimony of SGT Madaras (MIRC chat was added to the computers once they got to Iraq}; Testimony of Mr. Milliman (sometimes he would see software programs installed on the computers without his knowledge. but thal was not common}. :04 Testimony of PT Cherepko; Testimony of SA Shaver; Testimony of Mr. Milliman (MIRC Chat was authorized to be installed soldiers were not supposed to install it themselves but they could have done it if they wanted to}. 3'5 Testimony Keay (music tolerated so Soldiers could be more productive). 44 Continuation Sheet, DD ?rm 457, U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manni?n'g the basis for these charges is that PFC Manning attempted to bypass computer security mechanisms. added unauthorized software. misused an information system, and wrongfully stored classi?ed material as part of his efforts to provide information to WikiLeaks. Thus. the evidence of other potential regulatory violations in the SCIF at FOB Hammer - much of which appears to have been authorized, condoned. or at least had a mission-related purpose does not rise to the level of a potential defense against these Speci?cations. Rather. this evidence may serve as extenuating or mitigating evidence; in that case. however. the severity of the offense conduct is such that it would not indicate that disposition of the Speci?cations by anything other than referral to a general court-martial is appropriate. This is because this evidence does not indicate that. should PFC Manning be convicted of these Speci?cations. a sentence at or below the jurisdictional limits of a lesser level of court-martial would be appropriate, nor does it indicate that another disposition of these Speci?cations would be appropriate. Death Penalty Unwarranted With resPe-ct to Additional Charge 1. the defense noted that the government has stated that they will not seek the death penalty in this case. Should there be any question on this issue. I recommend against seeking the death penalty in this case as that penalty appears unwarranted given the facts and circumstances of the charged offenses. The Command?s Failures Made It Possible for PFC Manning?s Conduct to Occur There were numerous failures on the part of the command that could have prevented PFC Manning from conunitting the charged offenses involving classi?ed information and information available on SIPRNET. Most egregiously. the command took no action whatsoever to review whether PFC Manning?s access to classi?ed information should be suspended or revoked after he made statements. before the deployment even occurred. to the effect that the American flag was meaningless to him and he had no loyalty to this But there were other examples such as physical outbursts where PFC Manning?s behavior was such that it should have prompted review of his access to classi?ed informationzm There was evidence that had the command been aware of these issues. PFC Manning would have been removed from the While PFC Manning received regular behavioral health services, it does not appear any mental health provider made a de?nitive recommendation that his access to classi?ed information be rescinded until 28 May lO.2th Admittedly. the evidence surrounding the global address list showed that PFC Manning continued to obtain information in order to provide it to WikiLeaks even after losing his access to classi?ed information. which indicates that removing PFC Manning?s access to classified information earlier would not have entirely prevented his offense conduct. Nevertheless. the evidence also showed that. had the command taken steps earlier to review PFC Manning?s suitability for continued access to classi?ed information. the command 3? Testimony of SPC Showman in defense-requesred closed session. :07 See. for example. It) Ex. 2ND). at Ex. C. at Bates 0001336167 dated 2] Dec 26 Apr 09 [appears mis-dated]. and 8 May It) by then-MSG Adkins describing PFC Manning?s erratic behavior}. we Testimony of CPT Lim. 10 Ex. zuo). at Ex. Manning?s mental health records). at Bates a 0001414743. 45 Continuation Sheet, DD form 457, US. v. PFC Bradley E. Mannihg could have limited PFC Manning's Opportunity to obtain classi?ed information and information available on SIPRNET. The command?s failures in this regard, however, do not negate PFC Manning?s intent or knowledge in engaging in the charged conduct. Whether or not the commands failures could be considered extenuating or mitigating for purposes of determining an appropriate sentence should this case be referred to trial and should PFC Manning be convicted of any offenses. the severity ofthe charged conduct is such that this information does not bear on whether PFC Manning should face trial by general court-martial. trial by a lesser level of court?martial. or whether other disposition of the charges is appropriate. Simply put. this information does not indicate that the disposition of these charges should be less than by referral to general court-martial. This is because this evidence does not indicate that. if PFC Manning were convicted of the offenses. a sentence at or below the jurisdictional limits of a lesser level of court-martial would be appropriate should he be convicted. nor does it indicate that other disposition of the charges is appropriate. PFC Manning's Behavioral Health Issuesf?ender Identity Disorder Should Be Considered The record is replete with information concerning PFC Manning?s behavioral health treatment. including for his gender identity disorder?? The evidence also showed that PFC Manning told then-MSG Adkins about his gender identity issues by email,211 that PFC Manning had repeatedly searched for information on the Internet concerning gender identity disorder and had information concerning separation from the military for such disorder and concerning transgender persons in the milita ii that he used an online identity named brearmaemanning to communicate on the lntezrpet.? and that he cross-dressed as a female when he was on leave in late Jan?early Feb 10. There was. however, no evidence that PFC Manning?s behavioral health issues. including his gender identity disorder. prevented him from forming the requisite knowledge and intent for any of the charged offenses. Moreover, behavioral health evaluations prepared on 22 and 23 May 10 stated that PFC Manning ?had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings? and "was mentally responsible."3" As to whether evidence of PFC Manning?s behavioral health issues, although not rising to the level of a defense. could be considered extenuating md mitigating evidence. the severity of the charged offenses is such that this evidence would not indicate that disposition of these charges other than by referral to general court?martial is appropriate. This is because this evidence does not indicate that, if PFC Manning were convicted of the offenses, a sentence at or below the jurisdictional limits of a lesser level of court-martial would be appropriate. nor does it indicate that other disposition of the charges is appropriate. 2"'10 Ex. sup). Es. o. 3? IO Ex. 21in), Es. E. 3? 10 Ex. sup), Ex. F, o. l. 21310 Ex. 21(0). Ex. H. 3? Lamo Chat. 10 Ex. 19(0). at 4041. 1? 10 Ex. 21(0). Ex. at Bates is 00014133-39.000l4147-48. 46 Continuation Sheet. DD Form 457. U.S. v. PFC Bradley E. Manning PFC Manning Faced a Hostile Work Environment The evidence indicated that PFC Manning perceived that the SCIF at FOB Hammer had a hostile work environment against As to whether this evidence could be considered extenuating and mitigating evidence. the severity of the charged offenses is such that this evidence would not indicate that disposition of these charges other than by referral to general court-martial is appropriate. This is because this evidence does not indicate that. if PFC Manning were convicted of the offenses. a sentence at or below the jurisdictional limits of a lesser level of court-martial would be appropriate, nor does it indicate that other disposition of the charges is appropriate. Comparativer Little Harm Was Caused by the Leaks The defense argued that the charged information is ?out and open" in the public and ?the sky has not fallen? as a result. and thus questioned whether the determinations in the classi?cation review documents as to the harm likely to be caused by the release of the charged information are valid. The evidence showed. however. that the information PF Manning provided to WikiLeaks has been found in the possession of the enemy"? The evidence thus does not support a conclusion that little harm was caused by the leaks. PFC Manning Had an Idealis?c Motive for His Actions The defense argued that PFC Manning was young. idealistic, and had a strong moral compass. indicating that he had an idealistic motive for his offenses. The evidence showed that PFC Manning may have believed that his conduct was motivated. at least in part. by idealism. For example. in his chats with Mr. Lame. after explaining how weaknesses in protecting the information at issue helped make his actions possible ("it was a massive data facilitated by numerous both physically. technically. and perfect example of how not to do INFOSEC listened and lip-synced to Lady Gaga?s Telephone while cx?ltrating possibly the largest data spillage in american history pretty simple, and unglamorous weak servers. weak logging. weak physical security, weak counter-intelligence. inattentive signal a perfect storm"). PFC Manning gave a window into his motivation: ?its sad i mean. what if i were someone more malicious outlined above. the evidence showed that enemies ot'the United States possessed the information provided to WikiLeaks by PFC Manning. For example. the video named ?12 Jul 07 CZ ENGAGEMENT ZONE 20 SC. Anyoneavi" is contained in the recruiting video produced by Al-Qaida?s media arm (Bates 004082D2-236f} and is described as "footage published by the WikiLeaks website." which clearly indicates that the enemy obtained this video from WikiLeaks. That video also speci?cally references the leak ot?a State Department cable. which indicates they obtained the cable from WikiLeaks. and also references WikiLeaks documents describing communications by leaders in Islamic countries with the United States. which also indicates they are referring to State Department cables they obtained from WikiLeaks. 47 Continuation Sheet, DD ?it-m 457, v. PFC Bradley E. Mandi-rig could have sold to russia or china. and made bank?" and in response to Mr. Lamo's question as to why he didn't sell this information. PFC Manning stated. ?because it"s public data it belongs in the public domain information should be free because another state wouldjust take advantage ofthe try and get some edge ifits out in the it should be a public good?!? However. assuming that PFC Manning had an idealistic motive for his actions. such motive would not negate the requisite knowledge and intent for the charged offenses. Moreover. even if the nature of his motive could be considered extenuating and mitigating evidence should this case be referred to trial and should he be convicted of any offenses, I do not believe this evidence would indicate that any disposition at this stage of the proceedings less than referral to trial by general court-martial would be appropriate. Defense Objections During the Hearing 1. At the outset of the hearing. the defense objected to my acting as the Investigating Of?cer in this case and asked that I recuse myself?? I consulted with my legal advisor who advised me as to the standard of R.C.M. 902(a) that recusal is required if my impartiality may reasonably be questioned. My legal advisor also said that the test is ?any conduct that would lead a reasonable man knowing all the circumstances to the conclusion that [my] impartiality might reasonably be questioned." I do not believe a reasonable person knowing all the circumstances would be led to the conclusion that my impartiality might reasonably be questioned. and thus denied the defense?s recusal request. making the following essential findings of fact: a. As a civilian, I am employed by the Department of Justice as a Deputy Chief in the Criminal Division?s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section. My section does not handle cases involving conduct of which PFC Manning is accused. b. I was not aware of the specifics ofDOJ?s investigation into the WikiLeaks matter before reviewing materials in my role of as investigating of?cer. c. I sent emails to ecunsel concerning this matter from my usdoj. gov email account. d. I stated the reasons for my denial of the defense request to produce the DOJ file in this case in my written determinations as to defense requested evidence. e. While I am employed as a civilian by the Department of Justice that is investigating this matter. no aspect of my DOJ work in the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section is involved with or otherwise relates to the allegations against PFC Manning. f. I made written determinations as to defense-requested witnesses in writing based on my determinations as to whether the expected testimony was necessary to make an informed recommendation as to the truth of the charges. the form of the charges. and the disposition of the Lama Chat1 IO Ex. l9(D). at 33. ID Ex. 48 Continuation Sheet, DD [Farm 457, v. PFC Bradley E. Mann'iI-t'g charges. and also determined whether witnesses were reasonably available. I also considered whether the expected testimony was cumulative to the testimony of other witnesses. g. In addition. after my legal adviser called me on 15 December 2011 to discuss R.C.M. 405m? 1) and 405(a)(' to ensure that I was properly considering them. I reconsidered my earlier determination as to three defense requested witnesses. My legal adviser made no recommendations as to my determinations on defense requested witnesses. h. My determination as to the defense?s closure request was made after consulting my legal adviser and providing his advice to the parties. That determination was consistent with the legal advice I received. I provided the reasons for that determination in writing. applying R.C.M. 806(b)(2). (Subsequently. granted the defenses closure request in partm) i. My determination as to my ability to consider statements under penalty of perjury under 28 U.S.C. 1746 was made after consulting with my legal adviser and after providing his advice and cases and legislative history he provided me to the parties. and my determination was consistent with my legal advisor's advice. I provided that determination in writing to counsel via a 141-418 December email. 1 did limited research into the matter before seeking my legal advisor?s advice. j. I conclude that a reasonable person knowing all the above facts would not conclude that my impartiality might reasonably be questioned. 2. During the testimony of SA Graham. the defense objected to my admonishng the government that. with respect to evidence that the defense objected to based on lack of authentication. I would only consider authenticated evidence and I then asked the government ifthere were any documents they wanted me to consider that they would need SA Graham to authenticate before letting her off the phone. The defense objected that by making these comments I went beyond my role as 10 and was telling the government how to perfect their case. In making these comments. I simply was trying to make the proceeding more efficient by ensuring I wouldn?t have to call this witness again. She is in Hawaii and we had a hard time getting her on the phone. 3. During the testimony of SA Mander. the defense objected to my denial of their request that the investigative ?les ofthe FBI and the State Department be produced. I referred the defense to my written determinations as to defenseprequested evidence and noted that the defense can raise this issue at the appropriate time should this case be referred to trial. 4. During the testimony of CPT Lim- the defense objected to the witness stating that the accused?s conduct was service-discrediting and prejudicial to good order and discipline. 5. Before the taking of classi?ed testimony. the defense objected to the government?s providing late notice of their intent to introduce classified evidence and testimony and objected to the taking ofclassi?ed testimony and my consideration of classi?ed evidence based on this late 32? See IO Ex. 49. Continuation Sheet, DD Form 457, v. PFC Bradley E. Manning notice. The defense requesred that I append reasons for denying their request to the report of investigation. The main reason I denied the defenses request is that the converting authority?s special instructions requiring 14 days' notice of the intent to disclose classified information applies only to the defense. not to the government. I also noted that there was no evidence the government was trying to engage in trial by ambush. and that the defense had been in possession ofthe underlying information since 8 November 2011. 6. During SPC Baker?s testimony. the defense objected to my allowing the government to ask the witness about the accused?s statements about his feelings about the military. I overruled the objection. 7. During Mr. Johnson?s testimony, the defense objected to the government putting up a screenshot of a chat allegedly between the accused and Mr. Lamb showing the accused?s name rather than the online identity "bradassB'7.? sustained that objection. 3. During Mr. Lamo's testimony. the defense objected to consideration of the alleged chats between the accused and Mr. Lamo on the grounds that they are privileged under MILE. 503. The parties submitted written briefs on this issue?! I overruled the defense objection and my written determination of this issue is attached.222 9. On the morning of21 December. the defense objected to continuing the hearing until Thursday morning. 22 December. for arguments because the defense was ready to argue at l500 on 21 December. I denied the objection because at a conference on 20 December. the parties agreed to break early on 21 December and to present argument Thursday morning. 22 December. and the government relied on that agreement in planning its preparation. 10. Additionally. the defense made various objections throughout the testimony to the government?s questions. Those objections are contained in the transcript of the hearing. 33? lo Ess. 14, IO Es. 5t}. 50 IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT UNITED STATES CIVILIAN DEFENSE COUNSEL NOTICE OF APPEARANCE . MANNING. Bradley E.. PFC LLS. Army. Headquarters and Headquarters umpany. U.S. Amty Garrison. Joint Base Myer? Henderson Hall. Fort Myer. VA 22211 DATED: I6 December 20! I Pursuant to the Rules of Practice before Army Courts-Martial. I hereby provide notice to the Investigating Of?cer of my appearance on behalfof PFC. Bradley Manning. My of?ce address and phone numbers are: 1 I South Angel] Street. Suite 317. Providence. Rhode Island 02906: of?ce phone: (508) 689-4616 or (800) 588-4156: office fax: {508) 639-9282. I am a member in good standing and licensed to practice in the following states: Massachusetts -. California and District ofColumbia I have been sworn into the following courts: US. Supreme Court. Supreme Court of California. Court oprpeals for the Armed Forces. and the Army Court ofCriminal Appeals. I am currently a reserve member ofthc United States Army with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. I have been qualified and certi?ed under Article 27(b) and sworn under Article 42(a). Uniform Code of Military Justice. 1 have not acted in any manner that might tend to disqualify me in this Article 32 hearing. Respectfully submitted. Wk DAVID EDWARD COOMBS Civilian Defense Counsel UFCR. EXHIBIT THE UNITED STATES ARMY FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT UNITED STATES DEFENSE MOTION v. REQUESTING RECUSAL 0F INVESTIGATING OFFICER MANNING, Bradley E., PFC UNDER R.C.M. 902(3) US. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, DATED: 16 December 2011 Fort Myer, VA 22211 RELIEF SOUGHT 1. PFC Bradley E. Manning, by and through counsel, moves the Investigating Of?cer, pursuant to R.C.M. to recuse himself in the instant case. BURDEN OF PERSUASION AND BURDEN OF PROOF 2. As the moving party, the defense has the burden of persuasion. R.C.M. 905(c)(2). The burden of proof is by a preponderance of the evidence. ROM. 905(c)(1). FACTS 3. The Investigating Officer in this case is a career prosecutor for the Department of Justice. He has spent approximately 10 years prosecuting crimes on behalf of the United States government. 4. The Department of Justice has separately initiated, and is currently pursuing, a collateral investigation into the alleged crimes in this case. As part of that investigation, several individuals who may know or have come into contact with PFC Manning have been subpoenaed and ordered to testify at a grand jury hearing. 5. The defense requested in the Defense Request for Production of Evidence on 22 November 201 1, that the information obtained pursuant to the investigation being conducted by the Department of Justice be turned over to the defense. The Investigating Of?cer denied that request. 6. Both the defense and the government submitted a request for the production of witnesses at the Article 32 hearing. The Investigating Of?cer ruled that each and every government witness was relevant to the proceeding, though certain of the witnesses were deemed not reasonably available. Of the 38 witnesses that the defense requested that were not also requested by the m. arcs. truism azco) government, the Investigating Of?cer ordered only two witnesses to appear at the Article 32 hearing. In reality, one is not currently able to appear in person at the Article 32 hearing so the detonse has agreed to allow that individual to testify telephonically. This means that only one defense witness (out of 38} will appear at the Article 32 in person. In effect. the Investigating Officer?s ruling means that virtually all of the witnesses testifying will be government witnesses. 7. The defense also filed a motion dated 28 November 2011 requesting the Investigating Of?cer to close the hearing during instances in which the government intended to elicit four or five particular instances of alleged uncharged misconduct. The defense noted that the evidence is unreliable, likely inadmissible in a court-martial, and prejudicial to the accused. The Investigating Of?cer agreed that ?[T]here is a substantial probability that an overriding interest will be prejudiced if proceedings remain open.? However, he was of the view that options short of closure could remedy any potential prejudice of panel members. The defense asked the Investigating Officer to reconsider his ruling on closure; he refused to do so. 8. In the alternative, the defense asked that the Investigating Officer exclude media from the courtroom during the portions of the hearing in which the instances of alleged uncharged misconduct were referenced. According to the Manual for Courts Martial, this would not constitute ?closure? and thus would not be subject to the four part test outlined in R.C.M. The defense further requested that the Investigating Of?cer impose a gag order on all remaining (non-media) participants, prohibiting them from speaking about the alleged uncharged misconduct. The Investigating Of?cer denied the defense?s request. 9. On 8 December 201 1, the defense ?led a Request to Compel Production of Witnesses, including six Original Classi?cation Authorities (OCAs). The goverrunent opposed the defense?s request and sought to introduce unsworn statements of the OCAs in lieu of sworn statements under The Investigating Officer engaged in extensive research on behalf of the prosecution. producing five cases that he claimed supported the government?s position. The government, for its part, did not produce one case to support its argument. Ultimately. the Investigating Of?cer ruled in favor of the prosecution on the admissibility of the unswom statements. Notably; the Investigating Of?cer began his own independent research on this issue even prior to notifying the defense of his decision on whether the OCAs would be produced. WITNESSESIEVIDENCE 10. The following evidence is adduced in support of this motion: a) Resume of LTC Paul Almanza; b) Government Requested Witness List for Article 32 Investigation; c) Defense Request fer Article 32 Witnesses; d) Defense Request to Compel Production of Witnesses (8 December 20] e) Defense Request for Production of Evidence (22 November 2011); f) Defense Request to Compel Production of Evidence (1 December 2011); g) Sealed Defense Motion for a Closed Hearing under Rule h) Sealed Defense Response to Government?s 405(h)(3) ?ling. i) Emails pertaining to government?s request to introduce unsworn statements of OCAs. LEGAL AUTHORITY AND ARGUMENT 11. It is trite law that an accused has a constitutional right to an impartial judge. United States v. Butcher, 56 90 (C.A.A.F. 2001). ?The neutrality required by constitutional due process helps to guarantee that life, liberty, or property will not be taken on the basis of an erroneous or distorted conception of the facts or the law. At the same time, it preserves both the appearance and reality of fairness, generating the feeling, so important to a popular government, that justice has been done. by ensuring that no person will be deprived of his interests in the absence ofa proceeding in which he may present his case with assurance that the arbiter is not predisposed to find against him.? Id. (citations omitted). 12. Under R.C.M. 902(a), militaryjudge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which that military judge?s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.? This section was designed to effectuate an accused?s constitutional right to an impartial decision- maker and to preserve public con?dence in the military justice system. See United States v. Wright, 52 MJ. 136, 141 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (?The exhortation of the statute is designed to foster the appearance of justice within thejudicial system?); Butcher, supra at 90 (?This section was enacted to maintain public con?dence in the judicial system by avoiding even the appearance of partiality)(citations omitted). 13. An Investigating Of?cer is under the same obligations as a military judge to disqualify himself in cases where his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. ?In determining impartiality, investigating officers, whose functions are judicial and quasi-judicial, are held to the same standards as military judges.? United States v. Merritt, 2009 WL 1936628 at *2 (A.F.Ct.Crim.App.), citing United States v. Collins. 6 MJ. 256 (C .M.A. 1979); United States v. Cunningham, 30 CMR. 402, 404 l4. Notably, the test under R.C.M. 902(a) is not actual partiality, but the existence of a reasonable question about impartiality. R.C.M. 902 is not assessed in the mind of the military judge himself, but rather in the mind of a reasonable person who has knowledge of all the facts. United States v. Martinez, 19 MJ. 652, 654 (A.C.M.R. 1984) (?We note that the proper test is whether the charge of lack of impartiality is grounded on facts that would create a reasonable doubt concerning thejudge's impartiality, not in the mind of the judge himself or even necessarily in the mind of the appellant, but rather in the mind of a reasonable man who has knowledge of all the facts?) (internal citations and parentheticals omitted); United States v. Kincitetoe, 14 40, 50 (C.M.A. 1982') (?Any conduct that would lead a reasonable man knowing all the circumstances to the conclusion that thejudge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned? is a basis for the judge's disquali?cation") citing E. Thode, NOTES To Coos or JUDICIAL CONDUCT 6t) (1973); United States v. Foster, 64 NM. 331, 333 (C.A.A.F. 2007) (?the test is whether the military judge's actions would cause a reasonable person observing the trial to question the court-martial's legality, fairness, and impartiality"). 15. A reasonable observer with knowledge of all the facts in the instant case might reasonably question the Investigating Of?cer?s impartiality in this case for the following reasons: 16. The Investigating Of?cer?s Con?ict of Interest: The Investigating Of?cer in this case is a career prosecutor the Department of Justice. He has spent approximately 10 years prosecuting crimes on behalf of the United States government. To an outside observer, it appears questionable that an individual who has devoted much of his life to prosecuting criminals would now be able to "switch gearsimpartial arbiter. 17. The fact that the Department of Justice currently has an ongoing collateral criminal investigation in this case would also cause a reasonable person to question the impartiality of the Investigating Of?cer. The reasonableness of this belief is compounded by the fact that the Investigating Of?cer has determined that the defense?s request for the Department of ustice?s collateral investigation is ?not reasonably available.? Surely, to hold otherwise (Le. to compel production of the document) would put the Investigating Of?cer in a delicate and unpleasant situation upon return to his position as a Department of Justice employee. 18. Clearly, there is a real conflict of interest in having a Department of Justice prosecutor preside over the instant case. A reasonable person viewing the proceedings from the outside would have serious questions about the impartiality of this Investigating Of?cer. 19. The Investigating Of?cer?s Rulings on Defense Witnesses: The defense requested 43 witnesses. Ten of these witnesses were also requested by the government. Of the remaining 38 witnesses that were requested only by the defense, the Investigating Officer determined that only rive would appear at the Article 32 hearing. In reality, one is not currently able to appear in person at the Article 32 hearing so the defense has agreed to allow that individual to testify telephonically. This means that only one defense witness (out of 38) will appear at the Article 3?2 in person. In effect, the Investigating Of?cer?s ruling means that virtually all of the witnesses testifying will be government witnesses. 20. This case is said to involve the largest military leak of documents in United States history. The government has charged PFC Manning with 22 specifications, carrying a maximum punishment of life in prison without the possibility of parole. It de?es logic that, in a case such as this, the Investigating Officer would limit the defense?s ability to call the overwhelming majority of its witnesses. 21. Anecdotally, the defense observes that it has been able to call more witnesses in Article 32 hearings involving simple assault or minor drug possession. Here, where the accused risks spending life in prison, it is beyond the realm of comprehension that the defense would only be permitted to examine one witness in person. 22. The Investigating Of?cer?s ruling on the defense witness request would cause a reasonable observer to believe that the playing ground is not fair. While the government is able to call virtually everyone it wants, the defense must proceed with its hands tied behind its back. Such a one-sided ruling whether motivated by actual bias or not creates the reasonable perception that the Investigating Officer is not impartial. 23. The Investigating Officer?s Ruling On the Defense?s Closure Motion: On 28 November 2011, the defense filed a motion requesting the Investigating Of?cer to close the hearing during instances in which the government intended to elicit particular instances of alleged uncharged misconduct. The defense noted that the evidence is unreliable, likely inadmissible in an actual court-martial, and highly prejudicial to the accused. The defense argued that to allow the evidence to be adduced in an open fortun would prejudice PFC Manning?s right to a fair trial, as it would put a military judge in a position where he would have to ?un-ring a bell." 24. The Investigating Of?cer agreed that ?[T]here is a substantial probability that an overriding interest will be prejudiced if proceedings remain open.? He also agreed that the defense?s request was narrowly tailored. However, the Investigating Officer was of the view that options short of closure could remedy any potential prejudice of panel members. In this respect, he stated: I find that this part of the test is not met because, should this case be referred to trial, a military judge will have the ability to take appropriate protective measures. For example, a militaryjudge can ensure that thorough voir dire is conducted of prospective panel members. This would address the defenses concern that ?if [this] information is disclosed to the public prior to trial, it will have a detrimental impact on PFC Manning?s ability to obtain a fair and impartial trial because prospective panel members hearing the information are likely to form an opinion regarding PFC Manning based upon this information.? Defense 23 November 2011 request, para. 10. Thorough voir dire would also address the defenses concern as to the military judge and the defense having to ?un- ring a hell with the members" because it would cover any issues as to whether the public disclosure of this information affected prospective panel members? ability to sit on the panel. In this regard, I note that R.C.M. 912(f)(1)(M) and (N) state that member shall be excused for cause whenever it appears that the member [h]as informed or expressed a definite opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused as to any offense charged [or] [s]hou1d not sit as a member in the interest of having the court-martial free from substantial doubt as to legality, fairness, and impartiality." The discussion to R.C.M. 912(00) notes that ?grounds for challenge under subsection (N) [include] that the member: has a decidedly hostile attitude toward a party". The grounds for granting a challenge for cause would thus ensure that, as the defense has stated, Manning is entitled to a trial before an unbiased panel that has no preconceived opinions about him.? Defense 28 November 2011 request, para. 10. Finally, if this case were referred to trial a military judge will have the ability to issue rulings and instructions necessary to ensure that the trial is not affected by the disclosure of this information at the Article 32 investigation. 25. The Investigating Of?cer appears to have overlooked the severity of the charges in this case. PFC Manning has already been subjected to extensive media scrutiny in this case. He has been referred to as a ?traitor? who has ?blood on his hands.? Govermnent officials have even called for his execution. And all this was prior to PFC Manning even having a preliminary UI hearing. That the Investigating Of?cer claims that voir dire and an instruction can ?cure? the prejudice occasioned by the public disclosure of this information is further evidence of his bias. 26. In its Sealed Defense Response to Government?s 405(h)(3) ?ling, the defense pointed out that in all of the cases cited by the government in support of its motion to keep the hearing open, it was the government that was seeking closure over defense objection. Here, the defense is in the rare position of seeking closure to protect the accused?s right to a fair trial. The government?s rebuttal was, in essence, that the public had a ?right to know? this information. Incidentally, it is ironic that the government has championed the public?s ?right to know? in a case where the government?s position on the merits is that the public did not have a right to know. Based on his ruling, the Investigating Of?cer appears to have agreed that the publicis ?right to know? this evidence evidence that likely will be ruled inadmissible under M.R.E. 404(b) or 403 overrides the accused's right to a fair trial. 27. The defense requested that the Investigating Of?cer reconsider his ruling. In so doing, the defense reminded the Investigating Of?cer that ?[tjhis case has already been subjected to extensive media scrutiny and PFC Manning has already been adjudged guilty in the court of public opinion. Moreover, several high-ranking of?cials (both military and government) have made improper comments concerning PFC Manning's probable guilt and appropriate punishment. In a case such as this, there is no substitute for ensuring that potentially inadmissible and highly inflammatory evidence is not placed into the public realm.? The Investigating Of?cer was of the view that any prejudice caused by such statements could also be remedied through voir dire and instructions: Additionally, with respect to the defense?s reference to ?high-ranking of?cials havjing] made improper comments concerning PFC Manning's probable guilt and appropriate punishment," in Mr. Coombs?s 131621 December 2011 email, I ?nd that thorough voir dire and appropriate rulings and instructions by the military judge will adequately address the risk of unlawful command in?uence. 28. Apparently, the Investigating Of?cer is comfortable piling prejudice on top of prejudice so long as a military judge deals with the issue through voir dire or an instruction down the road. It is incomprehensible that the Investigating Of?cer?s solution is to allow what he and the concede will be negative fallout for the accused with a view to cleaning up the mess later on. 29. The defense motion requesting limited closure was, in colloquial terms, a ?no-brainer.? No prejudice can come of ruling in favor of the defense. Nor can any prejudice come to the government in ruling in favor of the defense. The only prejudice that can (and undoubtedly will) result is in the Investigating Officer ruling against the defense. The defense maintains that the government would like the media to hear the evidence precisely in order to cause the very prejudice which they then say can be ?fixed? through voir dire or a limiting instruction. Such a position is absurd and the ruling of the Investigating Of?cer in this respect would cause a reasonable observer to question his impartiality. 30. Although baf?ed by the Investigating Of?cer?s determination on its closure motion, the defense then requested that the Investigating Officer exclude the media from limited portions of the Article 32 hearing and issue a gag order for those non-media Spectators who remained in the court room. Such a solution would not be considered ?closure? under R.C.M. 806 and thus, would not be subject to the four-part test that the defense maintains the Investigating Of?cer incorrectly applied. The Investigating Of?cer refused to do so and would not provide a justi?cation for this ruling other than to cross-reference his previous ruling on the closure motion. 31. On 14 December 2011, the defense asked the Investigating Of?cer to reconsider his ruling on the closure motion and on the defense?s altemative request to exclude media from the courtroom during the portions of the hearing in which the instances of alleged uncharged misconduct were referenced. The Investigating Of?cer indicated that he would take the requests under advisement. On 15 December 2011, the Investigating Of?cer denied the defense?s request. The Investigating Of?cer did not provide anyjustification for these rulings. 32. The Investigating Of?cer?s Ruling on Government Witnesses? Unsworn Statements: 0n 8 December 2011, the defense ?led a Request to Compel Production of Witnesses, including six Original Classi?cation Authorities 33. The government opposed the request and instead sought to adduce unsworn statements from the six OCAs in lieu of sworn statements under R.C.M. The section provides that: The investigating of?cer may consider. over objection of the defense, when the witness is not reasonably available: i) Sworn statements; ii) Statements under oath taken by telephone, radio, or similar means providing each party the opportunity to question the witness Prior testimony under oath; and iv) Deposition of that witness; and v) In time of war, unsworn statements. 34. The government maintains the unsworn statements are, in effect, sworn statements. The government?s argument in its entirety is as follows: The United States objects to your consideration of Article 131, Perjury, as a reference in determining whether a statement is properly sworn. Article 131 is a punitive article intended to criminalize sworn statements by Servicemembers during ajudicial proceeding. The original classification authority (OCA) reviews are simply sworn statements made ?under penalty of perjury" 28 U.S.C. 1746. Rather than Article 131, the United States recommends you consider Article 134, False Swearing, and speci?cally the portion under the explanation which states, does not include such statements made in ajudicial proceeding or course of ustice, as these are under Article 131, See MCM, part IV, paragraph 79c(1). Under the defense's proposed analysis, the only sworn statements that you could consider during this investigation, are previously sworn statements given under oath at an Article 32 investigation or court-martial. [Email from CPT Fein, 8 December 20] 35. The defense asserts that the language of R.C.M. 405(g)(4)(B) is clear the Investigating Of?cer may consider only ?sworn statements? and not unsworn statements signed under penalty of perjury. In an effort to convince the Investigating Of?cer to apply the plain meaning of the statute, the defense pointed to Article 131 in order to show that the dra?ers of the Manual for Courts Martial were aware of 28 U.S.C. 1746 and chose not to incorporate that section into R.C.M. Had the dra?ers intended unswom statements under R.C.M. 405(g)(4)(B) to be admissible, they could have easily enumerated that exception under the section. 36. On 12 December 2011, the Investigating Of?cer, the government and the defense conducted a telephonic 302 conference. One of the issues discussed was whether the unswom statements could be admitted in lieu of sworn statements. The Investigating Of?cer sua sponte provided the parties with two cases that he believed supported the proposition the government was advancing. In other words, the Investigating Of?cer did the government's work for it. Notably, the Investigating Officer was investigating how to adduce the government?s evidence before ruling on the defense?s motion to compel production of witnesses. The Investigating Of?cer was looking for ways to admit the statements because he had already predetermined that the OCAs would not be called to testify in person. 37. By response email on 12 December 201 l, the defense objected to the investigating Officer's reading of the two cases it was relying on: In response to your request for us to look at 2010 WL 2265833 and 2002 WL 243445, the defense's position is that both cases are inapplicable to the situation at hand. In Faison, the ID found that TRD was unavailable and that her videotaped statement was sworn. Such a determination was appropriate given the fact TRD responded to questions indicating that she knew the difference between the truth and a lie and promised to tell the truth. As the 10 and the AFCCA correctly concluded, this colloquy more than adequately satis?ed the oath/affirmation requirement so as to make videotaped statement a sworn statement under R.C.M. In the instant case, unsworn statements under 28 U.S.C. U46 do not share any of the same hallmarks of a sworn statement. The statements are not made in front of anyone and the statements are not similar, in that they are not made in front of a person authorized to administer oaths. Likewise, Elsewer dealt with a videotaped interview that was done without a formal swearing or oath. However, it quali?ed as a sworn statement in accordance with R.C.M. since on a later date the unavailable witness did swear to the truth of the statements contained therein. The ID correctly found this to be a sworn adoption of the videotaped interviews that, pursuant to United States v. Wood, 36 NH. 651 (A.C.M.R. 1992), rendered it admissible. None of the individuals who provided the unsworn statements under 28 U.S. C. 1746 have subsequently provided a sworn adoption of their unsworn statement in accordance with R.C.M. An unsworn statement provided under 28 U.S.C. 1746 does not qualify as a sworn statement. In order for an unsworn statement provided under 28 U.S.C. 1746 to be admissible, it must be subscribed and signed "in ajudicial proceeding or course of justice" at the Article 32 hearing. A plain reading of 28 U.S.C Section 1746 and R.C.M. 405(h)(1)(A) undercuts any argument to the contrary. [Email from defense to Investigating Of?cer, 12 December 201 38. The government?s one line reSponse was, ?The United States maintains its previously stated position on the validity of the sworn statements." [Email from CPT Fein to Investigating Of?cer, 12 December 201 The Investigating O?icer did not ask the government to respond speci?cally to the defense?s argument or to advance its own interpretation of the cases. 39. On 14 December 201], the Investigating Of?cer ruled in favor of the prosecution, but not before taking it upon himself again to do the government?s research. In support of its ruling, the Investigating Of?cer produced three new cases that he believes supports the proposition the government is advancing. Only one of these is a military case; two are federal appellate cases. The defense maintains that none of the cases offers support for the proposition that an unsworn statement under 28 US. C. 1746 can be converted into a sworn statement under ROM. In fact, the only military case cited by the Investigating Of?cer, United States v. Ganderman, 67 MJ. 683 2009) appears to lend more support to the defense?s position that that of the Of?cer. The Army Court of Criminal Appeals in Gunderman emphasizes that, ?To be admissible before this court, factual assertions must be admitted in a proper form Indeed, our own internal rules re?ect this requirement for some form of solemnity." 1d. At 686-7. The court continued, ?By reaf?rming this requirement, we do not exalt form over substance However, assertions of fact must either be contained in the record or be offered in an admissible form.? Id. At 688. In short, Gunderman establishes that fenn is important and evidence proffered by either party must be ?in an admissible form.? 40. In making his ruling, the Investigating Officer stated, also note that the classification review statements at issue all indicate that they are in the ?course of justice? as they all indicate the persons making the statements knew they were being prepared for use in this case. As such, 1 consider these statements to have the same indicia of reliability as sworn statements.? [Email from Investigating Of?cer, 14 December 2011]. The last line of the Investigating Officer?s ruling clearly reveals that he has not deemed an unsworn statement made under penalty of perjury to be equivalent to a ?sworn statement" under Rather, he has determined that an unsworn statement should be admissible because it carries with it ?the same indicia of reliability as sworn statements.? Id. The Investigating Of?cer has fabricated a new ground upon which to admit statements under 405(g)(4)(l3) that the statement carries ?the same indicia of reliability as sworn statements.? The Investigating Of?cer, after bending over backwards to make the government?s case for it, has now read into 405(g)(4)(B) a new ground for the admissibility of unsworn statements. This is not permitted under military law. See United States v. Wore. I 232, 285 (CMA 1976') rule is well settled that a plain and unambiguous statute is to be applied, not interpreted. Where no ambiguity is apparent there is no reason to resort to rules of statutory construction, which are intended solely to remove not create doubt"). 41. In short, despite a clear statement in R.C.M. 405(g)(4)(B) that the Investigating Of?cer admit only ?sworn statements," the Investigating Of?cer: a) did extensive research on the issue on behalf of the govermnent; b) provided the defense with ?ve cases to support the government?s position; c) read in a new ground for admissibility into R.C.M. and d) proceeded to rule in favor of the prosecution. It strains credulity to believe that the Investigating Of?cer was acting as an impartial neutral when he actively engaged in extensive research to support the government?s position (without requiring that the government do this research itself) and proceeded to create a new ground for the admissibility of statements at the Article 32 hearing. The Investigating Of?cer has never once produced a case that supported the defense. 42. The Investigating Of?cer?s conduct in this case is similar to that of the military judge in United States v. George, 40 MJ. 540 (A.C.M.R. 1994). Like the Investigating Of?cer in this case, the military judge in George was ?a reserve officer who was normally employed as a civilian prosecutor." Id. at 543. The Army Court of Military Review noted that a civilian prosecutor who was on active duty for a short period of time for duty as a militaryjudge, it was important for him to ensure that his conduct at trial enhanced both the appearance and actuality of impartiality and fairness of the military justice system.? Id. In particular, the court in George held that ?[t]he military judge improperly limited the number of witnesses [for the defense] 1d. at 544. The court also expressed concern over the ?military judge assisting the trial counsel to try his case, and aiding him in making the foundation for these evidentiary issues.? Id. (internal citations omitted). Finally, the military judge ?made many rulings that revealed his advocacy for the prosecution" such that he abandoned his role as an impartial arbiter and ?became an advocate for the prosecution.? Id. In the instant case, it similarly appears that the Investigating Of?cer has abandoned his role as a third-party neutral and instead has become an instrument of the prosecution. 43. Based on: a) his civilian role in the Department of Justice and the ongoing Department of Justice criminal investigation; b) his ruling that the defense could only examine 2 of its 38 requested witnesses; c) his determination that the public?s ?right to know" supersedes PFC Manning?s right to a fair trial; d) his extensive research for the government, following by a favorable ruling for the prosecution; there is a reasonable question about the Investigating Of?cer?s impartiality in the instant case. A reasonable observer, familiar with the facts and circumstances surrounding this case, would conclude that the ?decks are stacked" against the defense and that the Investigating Officer should recuse himself in order to preserve the integrity of the militaryjustice process. 1 {l CONCLUSION 44. Based on the above, the defense requests that the Investigating Of?cer reeuse himself in the above-titled matter under R.C.M. 902. DAVID EDWARD MBS Civilian Defense Counsel 1] (Q 'd on the front lines for social justice December I. 5. 2.011 Clerk of the Court US. Army Court of Criminal Appeals 9275 Gunston Road Fort Belvoir, VA 2306075546 Re: United States v. Manning, Article 32 Hearing, Ft. Meade, Maryland; Julian Assange 3: Wikileaks v. United States 8; Lt. Col. Paul Almanza Dear Clerk of the Court: We represent represent the Wikileaks media organization and its publisher Mr. Julian Assange regarding access to the Article 32 proceedings in United States Bradlev Manning, scheduled to begin at Fort Meade. Maryland, on December 16. 2011. We are ?ling a Petition for Extraordinary Relief in Form of Writ of Mandamus to ensure counsel?s access to the Manning Article 32 hearing. Specifically, Ms. Jennifer Robinson and Center for Constitutional Rights attorney. Ms. Amanda Jacobsen, are attempting to gain access to observe the proceedings. This Petition seeks counsel's access to the actual hearing room in which the Manning proceedings are to take place. Consistent with the rules of this Court, please immediater forward this Petition to the Judge Advocate General. so to ensure that counsel?s rightful access to these proceedings is not denied. If you have any questions or concerns please do not hesitate to call me directly at 212- Respectfully submitted. Baher Azmy cc: Mr. Julian Assange Ms. Jennifer Robinson Ms. Amanda Jacobsen Clerk of Court. US. Army udiciary new york, ny 10012 i; WEE-L i'l? 34.195} :43? EXHIBH IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JULIAN ASSANGE and WIKILEAKS, Petitioners, Docket No. ARMY v. Article 32 Hearing in . United States v. Manning, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Ft. Meade, Maryland LIEUTENANT COLONEL PAUL ALMANZA, DATED: 15 December 2011 Respondents. _wx PETITION FOR.EKTRAORDINARY RELIEF IN THE NATURE OF WRITS OF MENDAMUS AND PROHIBITION, OR, ALTERNATIVELY, APPLICATION FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS, AND SUPPORTING MEMORANUM OF LAW Petitioners Julian Assange and Wikileaks, by and through their undersigned counsel, respectfully submit this request for extraordinary relief, pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651(a1, Rules 2(b) and 20 of the Courts of Criminal Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedure, and Rules 20.1 and 20.2 of the 0.8. Army Court of Criminal Appeals Rules. Statement of the Case and Issues Presented On November 28, 2010, the Wikileaks media organization and its publisher Julian Assange commenced reporting on thousands of allegedly classified and unclassified 0.8. State Department diplomatic cables. The cables were also published by other national and international media organizations, including The New York Times, The Guardian, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, and El HIV. BFCR. EXHIBII #5 Pals. To our knowledge, the U.S. government has never officially confirmed or denied whether any of the cables are indeed classified. However, the government has targeted and threatened Mr. Assange, Wikileaks, and their supporters, employees and contractors around the world with criminal prosecution arising from their journalistic activities. Although the U.S. government has never successfully prosecuted anyone accused of soliciting or receiving allegedly classified information, federal prosecutors have reportedly convened a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia to investigate whether Mr. Assange conspired with Army Private Bradley Manning to violate the Espionage Act of 1917, 18 U.S.C. 793 et seq., and other federal laws. The grand jury investigation conducted entirely in secret, without any involvement permitted by defense counsel, and in a district with the highest concentration of military and government jurors in the United States so far has included the issuance of subpoenas that reportedly name Mr. Assange, Wikileaks and Private Manning. These production orders have been served in relation to Wikileaks? supporters on media companies such as Google and Twitter. In addition, and of paramount importance here, Private Manning was arrested in May 2010 in Iraq on suspicion that he provided the diplomatic cables (and possibly other allegedly m. urea. EXHIBIT #3 classified information) to Mr. Assange and/or Wikileaks. Private Manning now faces the possibility of court?martial for offenses including aiding the enemy in violation of Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. These offenses are serious but wholly unproven. There is strong evidence that Private Manning has nonetheless suffered serious human rights violations as a result of these unproven claims, including prolonged isolation and sensory deprivation, and other torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment reminiscent of the worst abuses at Guantanamo Bay. The U.S. government has notably refused to allow the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Torture to adequately assess Private Manning's treatment and conditions. It is in this context that Private Manning?s Article 32 hearing is scheduled to commence at Ft. Meade, Maryland, on Friday, December 16, 2011. Notwithstanding the intense public interest in this case, and Petitioners? obvious, unique interest in these proceedings, as described below the limited procedures established to allow public access to the proceedings are plainly insufficient to ensure that Mr. Assange and Wikileaks, by and through their counsel, are able fully and adequately to observe the proceedings and safeguard their rights and interests, as well as Private Manning?s legal and humanitarian rights and the right of the public access to the proceedings. to NH. UFDH. Indeed, Respondents have failed and refused to guaranty access to Petitioners' counsel despite repeated communications and requests via telephone, email and letter to the U.S. Army District of Washington Public Affairs Office and officials at Ft. Meade. See, Attachment (letter requesting access}. Accordingly, the failure and refusal to respond to Petitioners? request for guaranteed access to the Article 32 hearing in this case, and the lack of adequate capacity otherwise to accommodate the media and other interested parties such as Mr. Assange and Wikileaks, constitutes a constructive, blanket denial of public access to the proceedings. Petitioners thus request that the Court grant relief as follows. Specific Relief Sought l. Petitioners request a writ of mandamus to compel the Investigating Officer assigned to preside over the Article 32 hearing in this case to provide and guaranty access for counsel for Petitioners to the proceedings in their entirety. 2. Petitioners request a writ of prohibition to reverse and undo the current procedures affording limited access to the Article 32 hearing, which constitute a constructive, blanket denial of the right of public access to the proceedings. 3. Alternatively, Petitioners request an order staying the Article 32 hearing in order to allow the Court to consider this Petition, and to allow Petitioners to seek any further W. crzz. and.th #3 judicial relief which may be necessary to protect Petitioners' rights and interests in these proceedings. Reasons for Granting the Writs The Court should grant the requested relief, pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651(a), to open the proceedings and ensure access for the public generally and for Mr. Assange and Wikileaks specifically. Relief should be granted because this matter involves exceptional circumstances warranting the Court's intervention at this time, relief has been requested but cannot be obtained in any other form or in any other court, and issuance of the write will aid the Court?s jurisdiction. Respondents? decision effectively to close the proceedings and deny access to Petitioners, particularly given their unique interest, is clearly erroneous and amounts to usurpation of authority. A. Eight of Public Access The Court?s authority to act on the merits of this Petition and grant relief is clear and indisputable. See Denver Post Co. v. United States, Army Misc. 20041215 (A.C.C.A. 2005}, available at 2005 CCA LEXIS 550 (exercising jurisdiction and granting writ of mandamus to allow public access to Article 32 proceedings). Equally established and uncontroversial is the right of public access to judicial proceedings, including Article 32 hearings, which may be overcome only on a ?case?hy?case, witness-by? HIV. BFBR. witness, and circumstance?by?circumstance basis." ABC, Inc. v. Powell, 47 M.J. 363, 365 (C.A.A.F. 1997), available at 1997 CAAF LEXIS 74. The right of public access is rooted in the common law and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. See, Nixon v. warner Commc?ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 59? (1978); In re washington Post Co., 807 F.2d 383, 390 {4th Cir. 1986); washington Post Co. v. Robinson, 935 F.2d 282, 287 (D.C. Cir. 1991). The right of public access exists to ensure that courts have a "measure of accountability" and to promote ?confidence in the administration of justice." United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1048 {2d Cir. 1995). Access to information is especially important when it concerns matters relating to national defense and foreign relations, where public scrutiny is the only effective restraint on government. See Maw York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 728 (1971) (Stewart, J., concurring) (?In the absence of the governmental checks and balances present in other areas of our national life, the only effective restraint upon executive policy and power in the areas of national defense and international affairs may lie in an enlightened citizenry -- in an informed and critical public opinion which alone can here protect the values of democratic HIV. DFBR. EXHIBIT #3 The Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that openness has a positive effect on the truth?determining function of proceedings. See Gannett Co. V. DePasquale, 443 U.8. 368, 383 (1979) (?Openness in court proceedings may improve the quality of testimony, induce unknown witnesses to come forward with relevant testimony, cause all trial participants to perform their duties more conscientiously"); Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 596 (1980) {open trials promote ?true and accurate fact?finding") (Brennan, J., concurring); Globe Newspaper Co. v. superior Court, 457 U.S. 596, 606 (1982) ("[P1ublic scrutiny enhances the quality and safeguards the integrity of the factfinding see also Brown Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. FTC, 710 F.2d 1165, 1179 {6th Cir. 1983) (Gannett's beneficial "fact?finding considerations" militate in favor of openness "regardless of the type of proceeding"). This effect is tangible, not speculative: the Court has held that openness can affect outcome. Accordingly, if the government attempts to restrict or deny the right of access, it bears the burden of by showing that the limitation is necessary to protect a compelling government interest and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest. See, Robinson, 935 F.2d at 287. In contravention of these authorities, Petitioners are informed and believe that Respondents in this case have set UH. Wald. ?Mall 33 aside only about eight seats in the Article 32 hearing room, for members of the media selected by the U.S. Army District of Washington Public Affairs Office, based on undisclosed criteria. They also understand that a limited number of other members of the media and the general public will be selected by lottery to observe the proceedings in an overflow room via limited video feed. These procedures are plainly insufficient to ensure that Wikileaks and Mr. Assange, by and through their counsel, are able fully and adequately to observe the proceedings and safeguard their rights and interests. B. Due Process Rights These rights and interests of Mr. Assange and Wikileaks may include, among others, their Fifth Amendment due process rights and their Sixth Amendment interest in confronting any allegations against them, particularly as relates to the grand jury investigation in the Eastern District of Virginia, which is apparently targeting Mr. Assange in connection with matters that will likely be addressed at Private Manning?s Article 32 hearing. Access is also important to protect Private Manning's legal right to a fair and impartial hearing, and his humanitarian right to be free of torture and other unlawful abuse, as well as the general right of public access to the proceedings. m. arm. EXHIBIT #5 As set forth above, Petitioners' unique interest in these proceedings is obvious. If prior official statements relating to Private Manning - both on and off the record - are to be believed, it is nearly certain that allegations regarding Mr. Assange and Wikileaks will be disclosed in these proceedings. See, Ellen Nakashima Jerry Markon, WikiLeaks Founder Could Be Charged Under Espionage Act, Wash. Post, Nov. 30, 2010 {quoting Attorney General Eric Holder and other government sources); Charlie Savage, U.S. Tries to Build Case for Conspiracy by Wikileaks, N.Y. Times, Dec. 15, 2010 (same). Mr. Assange and Wikileaks need to know what those allegations may include in order to ensure the proceedings are as open, honest and transparent as possible. Consistent with the factafinding purpose of open trials, which the Supreme Court has held may affect their outcome, Petitioners? counsel must have the ability to observe the proceedings in their entirety in order to evaluate live witness testimony and other evidence as it is presented. Counsel also must have access to the hearing room (rather than the overflow room} so that they may object and request permission to be heard if the Investigating Officer determines that it may be necessary to close portions of the hearing.1 Factual assertions made in these proceedings may well 1 To the extent that portions of the proceedings may be closed to protect classified information, CCR requests that its attorneys who already hold security clearances be allowed to observe the 9 L. HHIMT 3 be erroneous, and counsel for Wikileaks and Mr. Assange are in the best position to evaluate them and correct the record as may be necessary to prevent further substantial prejudice to Private Manning, and to protect the interests of Mr. Assange, Wikileaks and their supporters in connection with these proceedings and other ongoing or possible future proceedings here and abroad, including the grand jury investigation and any threatened prosecution of Mr. Assange, as well as any request for his extradition to the United States. Transparency and accountability are especially important in military proceedings such as these because "military trial courts in our country are not standing or permanent courts," and may be convened by various commanding officers without any centralized oversight at the trial stage. See Eugene R. Fidell, Accountability, Transparency Public Confidence in the Administration of Military Jostice, 9 Green Bag 2d 361 (2006). closed sessions on the ground that Wikileaks and Mr. Assange plainly have a ?need to know" all information concerning them. For example, it would be necessary for counsel to evaluate whether information was improperly deemed classified in order to conceal evidence of illegality or prevent embarrassment to the ExeCutive Branch. At a minimum, the proceedings should be delayed to permit a ?need to know" determination to be made by the relevant agencies and reviewed by the courts. 10 Wu ..F #3 Conclusion For these reasons, the Petition should be granted. Date: New York, New York December 15, 2011 Respectfully submitted, Xs/ Baher Azmy Vincent Warren, Executive Director Baher Azmy, Legal Director Michael Ratner, President Emeritus CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 1th Floor New York, New York 10012 Tel: (212) 614?6464 Fax: {212) 614?6499 Counsel for Julian Assange and Wikileaksa 2 Petitioners' counsel are not admitted to practice before the Court and therefore request permission, pursuant to Rule 8(c) of the Courts of Criminal Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedure, to appear pro hac vice for the limited purpose of litigating this Petition. Good cause exists to grant this request given the emergency nature of the relief requested and the serious nature of the issues at stake in this case. Counsel are members in good standing of the bar in New York State, and are admitted to practice before various federal courts. i_l HIV. BFCR. EXHIBIT 3 Certificate of Service I hereby certify on this 15th day of December 2011, I caused the foregoing Petition for Extraordinary Relief to be and filed with the Court, via facsimile and overnight mail, served on Respondents, via overnight mail, at the following addresses: U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals Office of the Clerk of Court 9275 Gunston Road Fort Belvoir, VA Fax: 703?806?0124 22060-5546 - and Clerk of Court U.S. Army Judiciary 901 North Stuart Street, Arlington, VA 22203?1837 Fax: 703?696?8777 Suite 1200 and Lt. Col. Paul Almanza U.S. Army Reserve Judge 150th Legal Support Organization Ft. Meade, MD 20755 Eaher Azmy IHV. UFBR. Exhibit A 4135-} s. centeriorconstitutionalright 5 December 13. 20! I Via Federal E_xpress Investigating Of?cer cfo Military District of Washington Public Affairs Office 103 Third Avenue Washington. DC. 20319 Re: United States Bradley ill-fanning Dear Sir: The Center for Constitutional Rights represents the Wikileaks media organization and its publisher Julian Assange regarding access to the Article 32 proceedings in United States v. Bradley Manning. scheduled to begin at Fort Meade. Maryland. on December 16. 201 I. We request that you allocate two seats in the hearing room. for a CCR attorney and for Mr. Assange?s non?U.S. counsel Jennifer Robinson. so that they may observe the proceedings on behalf of our clients. We understand from telephone calls and written communications with the U.S. Army District of Washington Public Affairs Of?ce and officials at Fort Meade that only about eight seats in the hearing room will be set aside for members of the media selected by the Public Affairs Office. We also understand that a limited number of other members of the media and the general public will be. selected by lottery to observe the proceedings in an over?ow room via limited video feed. These procedures are plainly insufficient to ensure that Wikileaks and Mr. Assange. by and through their counsel. are able fully and adequately to observe the proceedings and safeguard their rights and interests. including under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution. as well as Private Bradley Manning?s legal and humanitarian rights and the right of public access to the proceedings. Our clients? unique interest in these proceedings is obvious. For more than a year. there has been intense worldwide speculation that hundreds of thousands of allegedly classi?ed diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks as well as The New York Times. The Guardian, and other international media organizations - were provided to Wikileaks and Mr. Assange by Private Manning. There is strong evidence that Private Manning has suffered serious human rights violations as a result of those unproven claims. including prolonged isolation and sensory deprivation, and other torture or cruel. inhuman and degrading treatment reminiscent of the worst abuses at Guantanamo Bay. (Throughout all of his detention. the US. government has refused to allow the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Torture to adequately assess Private Manning?s treatment and conditions.) If prior of?cial statements relating to Private Manning are to be believed. it is nearly certain that allegations regarding Wikileaks and Mr. Assange will be disclosed in these proceedings. 1st. arcs. Etaiazt #3 98M Mr. Assange and Wikileaks need to know what those allegations may include in order to ensure the proceedings are as open. honest and transparent as possible. Their counsel must have the ability to observe the proceedings in their entirety in order to evaluate live witness testimony and other evidence as it is presented.? Factual assertions made in these proceedings may well be erroneous. and counsel for Wikileaks and Mr. Assange are in the best position to evaluate them and correct the record as may be necessary to prevent further substantial prejudice to Private Manning. and to protect the interests of Mr. Assange. Wikileaks and their supporters in connection with these proceedings and other ongoing or possible future proceedings here and abroad. Transparency and accountability are especially important in military proceedings such as these because ?military trial courts in our country are not standing or permanent courts." and may be convened by various commanding of?cers without any centralized oversight at the trial stage. See Eugene R. Fidel]. Accountability-t Transparent? Public Confidence in the Adminisrrm?ion of Military Justice. 9 Green Bag 2d 36] (2006). Mr. Assange also notably has a particular personal interest in the Article 32 proceedings because it appears that federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia have been issuing subpoenas to supporters of Wikileaks in order to investigate matters that. based on prior of?cial statements. will likely be addressed in Private Manning?s Article 32 proceedings. It has been reported that these subpoenas are the result of a grand jury process that has. as is the norm in the United States. taken place entirely in secret without any involvement permitted by defense counsel. in a district that has the highest concentration of military and governmentjurors in the nation. The names of Mr. Assange. Wikileaks. and Private Manning reportedly appear on many of the production orders coming out of this grand jury process that have been sort ed in relation to Wikilcaks' supporters on companies such as Google and Twitter. Moreover. guaranteed access for media organization such as Wikileaks and its publisher Mr. Assange is necessary to ensure public access to the proceedings. which is protected at common law and by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Indeed. given the intense public interest in this case. we are concerned that the lack of adequate capacity to accommodate the media and other interested parties such as Wikileaks and Mr. Assange may result in a constructive. blanket denial of public access to the proceedings. See Denver Post Co. v. United States. Army Misc. 2004135 (A.C.C.A. 2005), mtailable or 2005 CCA LEXIS 550 (granting writ of mandamus to allow public access to Article 32 proceedings). in sum. counsel for Mr. Assange and Wikileaks have a professional duty of care which must be exercised not only for the bene?t of our clients but also for others whose life or liberty is at risk. including alleged sources such as Private Manning as well as WikiLeaks supporters. employees and contractors who have been subject to US. government surveillance in relation to their constitutionally protected activities. We hope that you will approve our request for guaranteed access to these Article 32 proceedings. We further ask for your response by no later than the close of business on To the extent that portions of the proceedings may be closed to protect classi?ed information. CCR requests that its attorneys who already hold security clearances be allowed to observe the closed sessions on the ground that Wikileaks and Mr. Assange plainly have a ?need to know" all information concerning them, For example. it would be necessary for counsel to evaluate whether information was improperly deemed classi?ed in order to conceal evidence ofillegality or prevent embarrassment to the Executive Branch. A: a minimum. the proceedings should be delayed to permit a ?need to know? determination to be made by the relevant agencies and reviewed by the courts. l-J #3 Wednesday, December 14. 201 1. so that we may seek any relief which may be necessary in court. Mr. Azmy, legal director. may be reached by phone at - Very truly yours. Baher Azmy Vince. Warren Michael Ratner cc: Jennifer Robinson Convening Authority Exmattr? ?78m, Exhibit Offered But Not Considered Investigating Officer Exhibi IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT UNITED STATES SEALED DEFENSE STIPULATION v. 0F EXPECTED TESTIMONY MANNING, Bradley 13., PFC U.S. Anny. Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, DATED 17 December 2011 Fort Myer, VA 222! I 1. Pursuant to Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 1103A the defense ?les this sealed stipulation of expected testimony under R.C.M. It is hereby stipulated by the Defense, with the express consent of PFC Bradley E. Manning, the Accused, that if Ms. Jihrleah W. Showman were asked at this Article 32 hearing, she would testify the following: In the July or August 2009 timeframe, 1 was verbally counseling PFC Manning. During the counseling session, PFC Manning was not paying attention to me. I could tell by his body language that he seemed disinterested. I then raised my voice to get his attention. I asked in why did he join the United States Army. He told me that he joined the military for the educational bene?ts. I then tapped the flag on my shoulder and then said what does this flag mean to you. PFC Manning told me the ?ag meant nothing to him and that he belonged to no people. He then said he had no allegiance to this country. I became very upset at this point with him. I told SFC Adkins about this statements by PFC Manning and said that PFC Manning needed to be taken to mental health. 2. The defense offers this stipulation in order to avoid having to elicit this testimony from Ms. Showman or from any other individual in open court. The defense requests that the Investigating Of?cer direct the government not to elicit this testimony from Ms. Showman or any other witnesses. The defense further requests that the Investigating Of?cer direct the government to refer to this testimony as Testimony during its argument. ,7 we" . If.? gas-r3131 s. oh?vm PFC, U.S. Army Civilian Defense Counsel Accused EFCE. (D) Closed Hearing Checklist All spectators have been cleared out of the courtroom. ,jfi/? Ail remaining personnel possess a valid, SJA issued security badge. 0 I r?x . Guards are posted outside courtroom entrances. I I . . . Classified recording equrpment IS In place. I Audio and video feed to the M00 and the theater has been severed. Time 2255? Date ia/xeg?ex/ HIV. DFCR. 5 w/ ENMOSURE) DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY us- new murmur or wasnmeron 210 A eraser soar Lestev J. means. no 20319-5013 REPLY TO sum OF 15 December 2011 MEMORANDUM FOR LTC Paul Almanaa, 150th Judge Advocate General Detachment, Legal Support Organization, MG Albert C- Lieber USAR Center, 6901 Telegraph Road, Alexandria, VA 22310 SUBJECT: Request for a CloSed Session of the Article 32 Investigation United States v. PFC Bradley Manning 1. The United States requests you close the Article 32 investigation so that you may hear testimony relating to the following classi?ed evidence: a. Speci?cation 3 of Charge 11 (BATES 00378084 - 00378086 00378087 - 00378090). The existence of these underlying documents is classi?ed and open testimony about these documents is classi?ed. See Enclosure. b. Speci?c Testimony of SA David Shaver. SA Shaver will testify to the manner and method the accused allegedly used to access BATES 00378084 00378086 8: 00378087 - 00378090 and provide them to a person or persons not entitled to receive them. 2. The United States requests this closed session, and deems it necessary based on the following facts: at The documents are properly classi?ed; b. Protecting this classi?ed information from public disclosure is an overriding interest; c. The overriding interest of protecting this classi?ed information outweighs the value of an open proceeding; and d. The United States considered other methods of protecting the information. but no lesser methods short of closing the proceeding can be used to protect that interest and adequately present evidence on the relevant charge and speci?cation. I 5. Encl assess as CPT. A Trial Counsel UNCLASSIFIED w/ ENCLOSURE) OFCR. (.0 Open Hearing Checklist Classified display laptop (it used) is disconnected and secured. ?7 0 fr Secured all classified material from the IO Support Paralegal. Secured all classified material from the TC. Secured all classified material from the DC. Secured all classified material from the IQ. The courtroom safe is locked. Unclassified recording equipment is in place. 0; Time Date /8 Dec: Jo 41w. EXHIBH in? Closed Hearing Checklist All spectators have been cleared out of the courtroom. All remaining personnel possess a valid, SJA issued security badge. <74? 0 Guards are posted outside courtroom entrances. We Classified recording equipment is in place. Audio and video feed to the M00 and the theater has been severed. 04/ Signedkjy, H. Time/igfg? Date g/z/q Exitl?ii? ti 8) Open Hearing Checklist Classified display laptop (if used) is disconnected and securedort Parale al. ecure a assr re ma erla rom upp A Secured all classified material from the TC. Secured all classified material from the DC. 8 If 0 ecured all assi ie materia rorn the . The courtroom safe is looked. fr Unclassified recording equipment is in place. Time ?gag Date arcs. mum #91 MY. BFBR. EXHIBII If Ub? .9 r5 ManningB_00409631 'f Subjtu Re: Helio Again 112;- Bzir: "c 5:20:10 1.215.114 1:02 AM 1 Aim? 5:29:10 1:02 AM 13.1.1 R2. Helm Agam R- iktt??d?ih: Re: ju? Kicd: mu liter - no pun-1hr?: suppiicd . air?iw- Eh: Sunmedr is?: . Re: Hello Again {?203 HF .3312 AM You i'c' aria-1 an '1?1?5 Chazset: Version; vi.4.? (Darwin) 2' Ci? ManningB_DD409632 IHV. GFCR. a I Ei L, $155? 5621113? RE Helm Again 29:55.: ?9713 5:20:15 v.52 5:20.910 .02 AM 2 5:33:10 ,9 if; just R2: gust mm Mam-madman lwr-H'N m1- b?k?mmd?ia?s??- I. Erlc Schmieda: Helm You Cool. Why all the 9-51 main two: "coilateral murder,? when rcicaaing it atraigh?: Like preview leaks might have ended up winning more cuntzuvemy? 0n 51?193?16 5:59 E5. Bradley Fanning wrote: A ms: the saute: 05 up: l' 351?. f1? vise?s iron: tin} Agatha Bazaar-.3 Enema. munch killed the awn ?oumalima and injured tam xims. IIGL 0:1 ?213,413 12m; mi.- wrate: I Kim?? Pit-1:? {In 5.519.413: Eit??L Pal. Bradley! blazer. in; aerate: Art: you {miliaz with Eikibcaks? . .I u. w?r Mannim, Bradley E. I 13:. Emma. ms, _-ell war: pass Siz?flc 1 3m, mam: Ears you go. annys 5, . FEE-.5 . $355 L193. J33. ManningB_UO409683 login I Symamec - 3mm 51:51:23: Roars ?5 3 at" ?iad hit?-r?gi gas-5w?? Meme! hm: ?at pa ?wc? mwm: Meme: Adaism, A?iamaii 3? {3 9.: 4 skim. Rm??am Emmett {1:335 amizcatm? 3:35 New Au-E?mi eaetmt?k pa. Meme: 3& 5 iww? fater?e: ma-rcww? Iiim'?z?i mam-mi 11> in 2}?qu h?ieh trimmer: passwm? It?; Lem-s: 35mm: mas-Wm My {Team-3mg ?erzi?cates 3,52:- 5353: 3?40rm3 Mayan ape-mm sass-wart: 3:33: mange paw-mm! mas-rate: passwgi? ?ww?gamekEQW magma: ggls'swar? '?ivka't?e? 514. .- wg av: mum-2: mam-'3: passwr? ma ham Gm kitdz??w Feb 23:5: 32.23.35 H22 331:1 iris-3&3 WA 22?s.. AM 2, 3:31;} 36:33:58 AM Ma} '35, 2:21:16 NA may 2.4316 hr: 23, 231?; main mas 3m .25. Eat-3.53 9?7 2, 2-333 13:33:33 AM: my 24 11:43-43? AM 3141:! 25., E?li?e 154.41. 531% Fab ?12333 2% 5.623 PM Mar 14, 2Gil$ $36553 Pk? Eat?. 25. ?1516 ?2333 33 AM Far?) 3A 2:515! AW. may 9, 33" 3:43.48. FM $33! 3i 2333i} 5; 9.33 PM Mag: it $39.33 '1'31 AM MAY 2&3? 5:33: 33 my 28. 35.318 $535.31 95? Expire nu. @9222, Exam? #162 a ?ig: - an?nymi?y'waxy wank yra?azred gl?a?a. failmw?ng aha 4th ariqa?? ??mhat Gamhat'?mamf Qam?at $aamr ?ha uni?s hava ariginal mi i?th Hauntain iniaimn 32nd Aixharaa ?gvi?ion 33th Mauntain Eivi?imn - . - - - - vi??a agreadiag araa?? (Fart Enlkf cf?rt ?ragg, Caxaliaa} {Fag ?ammat, Ir?g} mgmgi?ha ?i?a$a E38 minu?a? in langth Windawa Madia vi?amw farmam} are mfficexa in unita Ear training purpw?a?. Th? m?ami Hm?ifiad? da?e Ear kh??e i? 12 S?iyt whe-wid?? ?raquantly wa?ah?a aha ?gsaad araun? ?y waximaa am as en?artaingmn? ia: at a year. vary muwh gra?axx?d You can currently contact our investigations editer directly in Iceland +354 862 3481 24 hour service; ask for "Julian Aesange". SEER, EXHIBIT 1(2) pg (5, (P) ManningB_004 09 721 1 Criminal Event Kidnapping Loo?ng Murder Smuggling 2 Enemy Action Ambush Assassination Direct Fire Indirect Fire Raid SAFIRE Sniper Ops 3 Explosive Hazard 1 2 3 4 5 6 Explosion Found I Cleared Hoax Suspected Interdiction Unexploded Ordnance riendly Action Cache Found I Cleared Close Air Support Cordon Search Escalation of Force Other Raid 5 Friendly Fire 1 2 3 4 Blue-Blue Blue-Green Green-Blue Green-Green 6 Non-Combat Event ManningB_DD4DQ?1 9 Hill, UFCR. 1 2-45. ?1 .4 Q?s ?v TASK: Acquire and exfiitrate gioba1 Address List From United States Forces Iraq (USF-I) Microsoft Dutiook Sharepoint Exchange server PURPOSE: To e?mai1 ciassified messages from CIDNE event leg from 2004 to 2009. METHOD: Acquire document ENDSTATE: TARGET: United States Forces - Iraq 0ut1ook Sharepoint Exchange Server OBJECTIVE: IHV. DFBR. IQ) - PEIT Ev] (ff- ct .4- ManningB_00376856 It?. UFBR. EXHIBIT it I Fr ,3 TO THE MRFIGHTER You are accessing a US. Government Information System that is provided for USE-authorized use only. By using this IS [which includes any device attached to this IS, you consent to the following conditions: The LISG routinely intercepts and monitors communications on this i3 for purposes gincluding, but not limited to, penetration testing, CDMSEC, monitoring, network operations and defense, personnel misconduct law enforcement 1, and Ecounterinteiligence [Cl] investigations. At any time, the USE may inspect and seize data stored on this IS. Communications using, or data stored on, this IS are i not private, are subiect to routine monitoring, interception and search, and may be disclosed or used for any USE authorized purpose. This IS inciudes security measures authentication and access controls] to protect USE interests-not for your personal benefit or privacy. Notwithstanding the above, using this IS does 2 not constitute consent to PM, LE, or Cl investigative searching or monitoring of the contect of priviledged communications, or work product, related to personal representation or services by attorneys, or clergy, and their iassistants. Such communications and work product are private and confidential. See User Agreement or details. Manninga_oo409635 .- Ya: u: a Taginwred uatn?: and r4223.an cl: Page-mac. Han-Rand carrnnuv deployed in Iraq with HeadQuarter, Headquarters Cnnpany {Hut} tor 3nd Brigade: Carma; Team, 132-, Haunt-sin bivision based out; of Fort cur-an. 5w York. 130 am currenti-y Mldquaztnrud at llama?, Iraq. In amide-Hm: 2999. cu: (mu. :cok we: we battleaapace prefimlly owned n3 3rd Brigade Cathet Team. 31nd airbarne Bivldibn {gut bf For; 3:39;, 599th Catalina.; a early Dumbo: 2609. during the protect or nit! ?1.19 {hm-ugh mus-twins: a! archival! material hm wavims hula-rum Maul. 911* mural mm: Irma our unit time, 23c? HUME Sound I vim a! a. bani-c that. mm: place ch 13?. JUL 205?. He the arm a In times. whim} names :0 learn tau: Lhe incident-L. and ecu: about sifting through cum-a mains-12.1- At the time. vs: did no: law at this mutant at tho mum. Eu th? 1a9m dag: savers: yecplc haum senL mm links to a HensSte: mtg; Ham-1.201 men c1! Lariat.- io ate-MM "dunked" and video 0: a ha;::a ;na: :cck place 1: cu: Currect battin-xpaco on 12 JUL roar. Two Heatern journalist: and several ?civi11ana" vora purpuraadly killed. 1 aasu can still pautou in an? deployed edition at ?Sadr: 4nd Siripea.? and o?iine 9:992 rh? {n11 widen :n also mutilahie an YbuTub? :xs?LRi?w fur vidcu enlin? appears on La name vadeu in our possession. avaiianln on our anaputur network "shaxad drch. the veznion we have in AOL no 33:0ua a: subzintoa. and is of a 319:2: quslity and r?a?1uti?n. I brought thi? tn :ha ?e chain?nl?coanand. and rvvivuvd the widen on my awn accard. and it appear: to ht neatly axaahly the any? (ogcopt In: aha airfarengua i?ntiunud above.) My chain?ufnuounand no interact in the nnth:. I read ?:am madia outchn :th oi astound :ayreaonaatiwau claimed that khay 'cauid not find the urigznal vlaeo." I do not know it they ;n inc; taund 5: or naL, but I thought ihlL 1! a: inVesiigaticn 19 taking 91am: and they cannoL {ind Lna video. we na?ca: Le hay: an origina; in at gassessima. 3 no not wish to Lake part in auyzh: . I have neatly set: the v;dno, and saw the quatatinun in ncdja. and thnuqht thin night yviht BcpanmenL of neicnqc azficialn. if inzezeuzcd. t: the right direct um . $hnnk 36?. var ?u?hiaq. $r?dicy 1-12-17? Mann-3:? 132' xamxvr. i?4q IHVI mama was? mum! Murder?: origin: mm c- 1.3 1.2221555} . Nift- 1 UFCR. HLP) pg, .2 of- 35 CURRENT NEWS EARLY BIRD March 18,2010 Use of these news items does not re?ect of?cial endorsement. Reproduction for private use or gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. Item numbers indicate order of appearance only. AFGHANISTAN l. Taliban Hit Back In Maria With A Campaign Intimidation [New York Nordland The Taliban have begun waging a campaign of intimidation in Marja that some local Afghan leaders worry has jeopardized the success of an American-led offensive there meant as an early test of a revised military approach in Afghanistan. Taliban sin or In attl 1- Mar at: (Philadelphia Inquirer). . . . Heidi Vogt. Associated Press A month after losing control of its southern base in Marjah. the Taliban has begun to ?ght back. launching a campaign of assassination and intimidation to frighten people from supporting the United States and its Afghan allies. 3. ik aidT KilALeadr I a a (New York Times).. ..David E. Sanger A strike by an unmanned drone last Week killed a senior commander of Al Qacda who had played a significant role in planning the killing of Central Intelligence Agency operatives in late December at a base in Afghanistan. according to American of?cials. 4. ttacks ar'ln In Washington Whitlock Taliban ?ghters more than doubled the number of homemade bombs they used against US. and NATO forces in Afghanistan last year. relying on explosives that are often far more primitive than the ones used in Iraq. 5. ah H. MeMiehael Efforts to lay political and security groundwork in the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar have already begun. even as the U.S.-led coalition continues efforts to pacify Marjah, the U.S. general leading the effort said Wednesdayraft (Renters. com) . . . . Peter Gram Reuters One of the most important trade routes in Asia was closed last week while a boyish-looking man everyone calls "the general" shoWed around the commander of US. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Afghan Dent (Phifodefpfiio fnqnireri . . . . Associated Press The United States has reached an agreement with other countries to cancel $1.6 billion in debt owed by Afghanistan to creditor nations and international lending organizations. TE ROR I SM m. urea. imp-) - FT ManningB_DD409686 _3 (Jr page I ll. lADir rn Atta HaeHhie l-a a (Washington Warriclr and Peter Finn Aggressive attacks against al-Qaeda in Pakistanls tribal region have driven Osarna bin Laden and his top deputies deeper into hiding and disrupted their ability to plan sophisticated operations. CIA Director Leon Panetta said Wednesday. Milita - a] ti i WashingtonpostxoW..?Anne Flaherty. Associated Press The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said Wednesday that it remains the goal of U.S. troops to capture Usama bin Laden alive and "bring him to justicer?Warn (Christian Science Monitor Richey The United States faces an expanding array of AI Qacda-related threats that extend far beyond the lawless regions of southwest Asia and into the US itself via radical Islamist websites. FBI Director Robert Mueller told a House Appropriations subcommittee on Wednesday. IRAQ ll. Irrain tri Aw: i {Lost Angela's Parker With more than 86% of the votes tallied in Iraq?s parliamentary elections and the race still neck and neck, hopes that the country might move beyond its deep Shiite-Sunni divide appear to be fading in a slew of sectarian politics. 12. Vote Accentuate-s Iraq's Deep Splits (Washington Fade] The emerging results from last week's parliamentary elections have made clear that Iraq remains a dangerously polarized nation, with deep regional and sectarian schisms that could widen as the us. military draws down CONGRESS i3. Turns Up Heat 0n Earmarks, Pentagon (St. Louis Post-Dispatchin?ill Lamhrecht Sen. Claire MeCasltill is pressing the Pentagon to release records on billions of dollars in defense projects aivarded through congressional earmarks. part of a growing move to restrict lawmakers' practice of directing expensive projects back home to their districts and states. l4. 2 ad?! a As Hill Ba I: 2 Herb (Defense Rutherford Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said yesterday the service is keeping a mid-April deadline for industry bids on the Littoral Combat Ship (LCSL amid concerns about the losing shipbuildcr protesting the contract award and a call from one side to delay the schedule 15. ?pth sides To Tgs?? ?gy Ban Hearing H. MeMiehael Thursday?s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the ?don?t ask. don't tell" policy that bars open service by gays the second in six weeks will feature three outside witnesses who are all former commissioned of?cers. lti. hall :1 es :1 tract-In .. ..Antonic Boessenkool The Pentagon has made major improvements in how it contracts for "contingency" operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for jobs such as food service, laundry. construction, security. translators and logistics, but challenges remain. Pentagon and Government Accountability Of?ce officials told Congress members March IT. oat 3 id Wi I Matthews Okay, everyone agrees - the cost of' solid rocket motors is going up. The question is how much. Sen. David Vitrer. insisted again March that the cost of solid rocket motors that the .5. military needs for its intercontinental ballistic missiles will double Barack Obama gets his way. (in. arcs. into) Lioi 35 - ManningB_0040963? page 3 IR. rs noel ht fsWamA ain Bo se. Maze Despite meeting all recruiting and retention goals. the service personnel chiefs pleaded with a House panel Wednesday to keep paying enlistment and selective bonuses. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT l9. ?guraan Sges A Threat inige (New York Strom To the list of the enemies threatening the security of the United Statcs. the Pentagon has added WikiLcaks.org. a tiny online source of information and documents that governments and corporations around the world would prefer to keep secret. 2t]. - {San Antonio Contreras As he bats down allegations that he ran an DfT-thc-boolts spy operation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. a civilian Defense Department of?cial has been locked out ofhis of?ce at Lackland AFB and remains cautious about who visits him at his San Antonio apartment. 21. a l' lnTheD a (European Stars and Patton As millions of Americans scramble to make last-minute adjustments to their NCAA tournament brackets, the Defense Department is playing the role of bracket buster before the tournament even tips off Thursday. 22. To Battle Qnmgutcr Hackers. The Pentagon Trains (hm Thompson After years of building ?rewalls and other defenses against relentless hacker attacks. the Pentagon is going over to the dark side of computer warfare. Only ethically, of course. The Defense Department. like most large organizations, has recognized that no wall is high enough to keep out skilled and determined hackers for keeps. Instead. it has decided that in order to anticipate and thwart those attacks. it needs to know what the hackch lmow. PAKISTAN 23. Ll!" .I (New York aqar Liillani and ack Healy Five young American Muslims detained in Pakistan in December on suspicion of seeking to join jihadists in Afghanistan were formally charged Wednesday, in a case that added to fears that Westerners might increasingly be taming to lslamist-inspired terrorism5T0 all (Renters. Entous. Reuters U.S. investigators have recently been given more regular direct access to Pakistani-ch interrogations of the Afghan Taliban?s No. 2 leader. US. of?cials said on Wednesday. one month after his arrest was announced. ASIAIPACIFIC 25. {Washington services Officials in the impoverished Central Asian nation of said the United States plans to build a $5 million military base fer training local troops. already hosts a LLS. base in Manes. outside the capital. Bishkek. which is used as a regional hub for the U.S.-led war in nearby Afghanistan. The government last year backed offa threat to evtct US. forces from Mamas a?er Washington offered to triple its rent. 26. H3. tDefemeNen-w. mm)" . . Shaun Tendon. Agenec The United States said March 1? that it needs to maintain a base on the Japanese island of Okinawa to defend the region. as the new in Tokyo considers scrapping a previous plan. I w. A ManningB_OO409683 of- 35 page 4 Kim. Reuters North Korea has increased its missile arsenal by 25 percent in the past two years to about LOUD. expanding the threat the state poses to the region. the South's defense chief said Wednesday. 28. long-? ms Years Lgft? {Korea Herald). . .. Kim Sovhyun North Korean leader Kim .loug-il. whose questionable health has received international attention. appears to have three years left to liver a senior U.S. of?cial was quoted as saying. EUROPE 29. s'nLae nr tl (New York With the United States and Russia still haggling over the ?ne print of a long-delayed arms control pact, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton Ie? Washington on Wednesday for high- level meetings in Moscow, as the Dbama administration tried to push the talks across the ?nish line. 30. ykrsine: Venue Offered For Arms Talks (New York E. Kramer Ukraine?s new president, Viktor F. Yanukovich. has o?crod Kiev as a location for the United States and Russia to sign a revamped nuclear arms reduction u'eaty, once it has been agreed to. Ml DEAST 31. Obama Says To Pu rsue Aggressive Iran Sanctions (Reuters. Mason and Deborah Charles, Reuters President Barack Ubama said on Wednesday the United States would pursue "aggressive sanctions" to prevent lran from getting a nuclear weapon that could potentially spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. AMERICAS 32. linton ales To Mexi uT TalkAbout Dr Fl . Deborah Charles. Reuters US. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will lead a top-level delegation to Mexico on March 23 to discuss efforts to ?ght drug cartels, I0 days after three people linked to a US. consulate were killcd in a border city. AIR FORCE 33. Matthew Chen-y. John Roberts For nine years. she kept a secret. Jene Newsome didn?t tell anyone in the Air Force she was a lesbian. Then just as momentum was building to repeal the military's "Don?t Asia Don't Tell" policy. was outed by a third party. It was actually her local police department in South Dakota a?cr they saw an Iowa marriage certi?cate in her home. NATIONAL SECURITY 34. Inside The Rio Washington Gert: coining; Conventional vs. nuke; Antiomilitary fatwa. PIRACY 35. a P'ral or i (London Times}. . . . Foreign Staff Dutch Marines fought off an ill-advised attempt by pirates to hijack the warship Trump off the coast of Somalia yesterday. ManningB_00409689 page 5 MILITARY 36. Making A O?Neil We?re back with our ?Making A Di report tonight. It's about a military tradition in this country dating back to the time of the cavalry, using a horse-drawn hearse -- a caisson -- at military funerals. 3 7. (New York Winter Sheng, a photographer. had ?nished the ?rst phase ot'?Don?t Ask. Don?t Tell," a series of portraits of gay men and lesbians serving in the military. all of them in uniform and with their faces obscured in some way by a hand. a door frame or by darkness. VETERANS 38. Washington Post). . . Associated Press VA medical centers need to Speed up compensation and pension medical exams to veterans so that it can expedite disability claims, the department's inspector general reported Wednesday. 39. iath Wat(New York Thomas journey to the Paralympies began in 2005. Two months after he was deployed to Afghanistan with the Army, an explosive device went offender the truck in which he was riding. Both of his legs were later amputated above the knee. While recovering at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio. Soulc threw himself into athletics. sampling sports like fencing and sitting volleyball. BUSINESS 40. Al 2 Pr i Deal (Washington Port).. .. News The Air Force said it will request $6.5 billion. or foot years of funding, for a Lockheed Martin military communications program that plans to launch its ?rst satellite in September after six years of delays. The funding request for ?scal years an 2-2015. part of a $9.9 billion program. suggests that delays and technical problems have been worked out. hr 2 ALin In a Tanker Price (The Tiron Northrop Grumman?s announcement backing out of the competition for the Air Force's $35 billion refueling aircra? contract included a ?nal parting shot at main rival Boeing. 42. in [ed 1* Amid (Defense Malenic A top Boeing of?cial said yesterday that the company will provide the Defense Department thorough pricing data should it be chosen to provide the Air Force with a replacement ?eet for its aging KC- 35 tanker aircraft. 43. ?ngering (Aerospace Dniiv d?c De?nite Re;mrti.. Lockheed Martin?s ?rst F-3SB {Stovl} aircraft demonstrated the capability to hover freer March 17 during a test ?ight at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md. OPINION 44. ure' i (Washington Post}. David Ignatius The headline read like something you might see in the conspiracy-minded Pakistani press: "Contractors Tied to Effort to Track and Kill Militants." But the story appeared in Monday?s New York Times. and it hi some big problems that have developed in the murky at between military and intelligence activities. ManningB_00409690 page (1 45. A Politically Feasible ,lgt {New l?ork There has been yet another setback in the Air Force?s long. agonizing process to replace its fleet of Eisenhower-era aerial refueling planes. Northrop Grumman and its European partnerT the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company. dropped out of the competition this month. charging that the new contract speci?cations are tilted against their much larger Airbus A330 in favor of Boeing?s 76?. CORRECTIONS 46. Cogection Washington Washington Post A March [7 Economy Business article, about accusations in Europe that the Pentagon altered speci?cations for a new refueling tanker plane to favor Boeing in its competition for the contract against a consortium that includes Europe's Airbus. incorrectly referred to the Boeing 763' as new. The jettincr. a military version of which is a contender for the contract, has been in service since [982. Hill. BFCR. .13 Bd? ManningB_00409691 New York Times March Ill. Bill!) Pg. l. Taliban Hit Back In Marja With A Campaign 01' Intimidation By Rod Nordland KABUL. Afghanistan The Taliban have begun waging a campaign of intimidation in Marja that some local Afghan leaders worry has jeopardized the success of an American-led offensive there meant as an early test of a revised military approach in Afghanistan. The Taliban tactics have included at least one beheading in a broader effort to terrorize residents and undermine what military of?cials have said is the most important aim of the offensive: the attempt to establish a strong local government that can restore services. The offensive ousted the Taliban from control of their last population center in southern Helmand Provinec. but maintaining control over such territory has proved elusive in the past. Though Marja has an occupation force numbering more than one coalition soldier or police of?cer for every eight residents, Taliban agitators have been able to wage an underground campaign of subversion, which residents say has in the past two weeks. ?After dark the city is like the kingdom of the Taliban." said a tribal elder living in Marja. who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of the Taliban. ?The government and international forces cannot defend anyone even one kilometer from their bases." The new governor of Marja. Haji Abdul Zahir. said the militants were now holding meetings in randomly selected homes roughly every other night. gathering residents together and demanding that they turn over the names of anyone cooperating with the ManningB_00409692 authorities. Mr. Zahir said the Taliban also regularly issued ?night letters." posted at mosques or on utility poles. warning against such collaboration. and o?cn intimidated residents into providing them with shelter and food, even in densely populated neighborhoods of the city. which has a population of 30,000. "They are threatening and intimidating these people who are cooperating." he said in a telephone interview. ?They have been involved in the area for a long time and they know how to intimidate people. They threaten them with beheadings. cutting off hands and feet, all the things they did when they were the government.? More than 6.000 American soldiers, Marines and British soldiers fought their way into Marja beginning Feb. 13. along with thousands of Afghan troops and police of?cers. Many others have reinforced the occupatirm since to protect an in?ux of Afghan of?cials and Western experts to build an effective government in Marja. That effort to win own the local populace is at the heart of the American and Afghan government strategy. and NATO officials have said it is proceeding well. Journalists have still not been allowed to visit Marja independently. however: they must be embedded with the American military. Marja is meant to be a template for a similar campaign aimed for spring in neighboring Kandahar Province. the Taliban's heartland. NATO and Marine Corps spokesmen did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the situation in Marja. Mr. Zahir said it was dif?cult for the authorities to counter the Talibanis campaign because the militants were mostly moving around without guns. relying on fear rather than threats. ?If they are detained. they claim they are just ordinary citizens." he said. ?At the same time. they still have a lot of sympathy among the people." He said it was impossible to estimate how many Taliban ?ghters remained in the city. ?It?s like an ant hole." he said. ?When you look into an ant hole. who knows how many ants there are?? The tribal elder declared that in his area. called Block S. the Taliban had complete freedom of movement after dark. He said he believed that was true in many other parts of the city as well. He and the governor were among ?ve community leaders in Marja who expressed similar concerns about the Taliban intimidation campaign. On March 10. the elder said. a resident of the same area named Nissar Ahmad. 25. was abducted from his home and beheaded. and his body was dumped at night next to the main local school. where residents would be certain to see it in the morning. saw his body myself.? the elder said. adding that he had heard of other beheadings. Mr. Ahmad had previously been a Taliban supporter but had switched allegiance after the city fell. the elder said. Mr. Zahir dismissed reports of beheadings as rumors. Mr. Ahmad. he maintained. was killed as the result of a personal dispute. However. he said there had been Taliban beatings. including that of a teacher at a new school who was severely beaten on Tuesday. Walid Jan Sabir. the Afghan member of Parliament for Marja and the surrounding Nad Ali District. said he had heard reports from Marja elders visiting his of?ce in Kabul this week of two bclreadings of pro-government elders. both members of the govemment's Community Development Council. MI. Sabir scoffed at Mr. Zahir's denial of beheadings. saying. ?He is not from the area and he is only staying in his of?ce so he doesn?t know Hit. arcs. page 7 what is happening." Mr. Zahir lived for many years in Germany. where court of?cials said he was jailed for stabbing a stepson. Mr. Zahir has denied that. A spokesman for the Interior Ministry. Zemarai Bashary. said the police in Marja had been told to investigate the beheading reports. ?We don?t know ifit's one person or many cases and many persons. but We are investigating and we will soon have an answer." he said. The Marja elder also said there were many accounts of the Taliban's forcing residents to attend night meetings where they threatened retaliation against anyone cooperating with the government or NATO and wamed that anyone who took even a low-paying government job would have his earnings con?scated. Mr. Zahir said there were many accounts of such con?scations from new employees in government work programs. The elder said most people in Marja supported the government?s efforts to restore control. but most were also afraid to challenge the Taliban. "I'm not saying the Taliban will win this war." he said. ?If the government strengthens their positions and creates small bases all over town close to one another and then permanently patrols between these bases. they can get rid of the Taliban." Mr. Sabir Was critical of American and Afghan forces for surrendering the night. ?At night the local people are the hostages of the Taliban." he said. Since many tribal leaders have fled out of fear. and many of the Afghan of?cials coming in now are not from Marja. it is dif?cult for them to know who the Taliban activists are. ?The Taliban and the Marja residents all have boards and turbans so it's impossible to distinguish them." he said. ?If it goes on like this I?m sure the situation will deteriorate and we'll ?nd it?s chaos there 99 Ci of or again." Sanger Rohimi contributed reporting ??om Kobui. and on employee of The New York Helmand Province. Philadelphia Inquirer March 18. 2. Taliban Using Fear In The Battle For Marjah US. troops counter with dmiomaty and development. but my quick action is key. By Heidi Vogt, Associated Press MARJAH. Afghanistan -- A month after losing control of its southern base in Marjah. the Taliban has begun to ?ght back. launching a campaign of assassination and intimidation to frighten people from supporting the United States and its Afghan allies. At least one alleged govemment sympathizer has been beheaded. There are rumors that others have been killed. Afghans in the town that Afghan. and NATO troops captured in a [lune-week assault that began Feb. 13 awake to letters posted on their doors Warning against helping the troops. The new governor of Mar-jab. Abdul Zahir, said the Taliban was now holding meetings in randomly selected homes roughly every other night, gathering residents and demanding they turn over the names of anyone cooperating with the authorities. Winning public support in this former Taliban stronghold in Holmand province 360 miles southwest of Kabul is considered essential to preventing insurgents from returning. Military commanders believe the Taliban campaign is achieving some success because of questions raised at town meetings: Do the 1.1.5. forces want to shut down the mosques and ban prayer? Will they use lookout posts on their bases to ogle women? Are they going to take farmers? land astray?? "Dislocating the insurgents physically was easy." said Lt. Col. lc?' Rule. head of operations for Marines in Helmand. "Dislocating them socially - proving that we're here to stay and to help - is a lot harder." There are no ?rm ?gures on how many Taliban ?ghters are left in Marjah. Marine and Afghan of?cials say they believe that most of those still here are from the area and that the foreign ?ghters have ?ed. Regardless of Taliban numbers. their in?uence is still felt. New cell-phone towers brought phone service to Marjah a little more than a week ago. But the service doesn't work at night because the Taliban threatens or bribes tower operators to shut off the network. presumably to prevent people from alerting troops as extremists plant bombs after dark. Some of the Workers on canal-clearing projects have been threatened or have been beaten up by insurgents. At least one canal worker who received threats returned and said he would keep working despite the risk. said Maj. David Fennell. who oversees about 15 civil affairs troops. "That's when you know that you fought the Taliban and you won." said. This is the struggle for Matjah now: winning people over with ajob or a vaccination for a child. The victories are small because the Taliban already proved it can make good on its promises by enforcing harsh justice while in power. "My sense is that the Taliban will rein?ltrate in due course as the Afghan government fails to live up to the modest expectations NATO has of it." said Patterson. a former UN. political?atTairs expert in Afghanistan. "1 do not think that the Taliban have been weakened in Helmand by the loss of Marjah." Many of the estimated R0300 people here share the same fears. even though there are about 4.000 NATO and Afghan troops in and around Marjah. Some say they are afraid to take money from the military bccatIsc if the Taliban ?nd them with the cash. they will be punished. The Marines are trying to win partly through diplomacy and partly through getting development and infrastructure projects running as quickly as possible. U.S. troops are having success with offering to repair mosques or install loudspeakers to try to win over mullahs while creating an unattractive target for Taliban extremists who won't want to attack mosques. This may overestimate the Taliban's restraint. The beheaded man was a mosque leader. Even so. projects of all types push ahead. Three medical clinics are open and two interim schools have started with more than students. Zahir said he and his advisers believe they need to show they have the Upper hand by the end of the month. "We have about two weeks to prove ourselves." he said. The Marines refuse to give precise time ?ames but acknowledge they have only a short time. "If this takes six to seven months. that gives a big enough window to the Taliban." Marine Lt. Col. Calvert Worth Jr. said. This urticie contains information from the New York Times. New York Times March 13. ECHO 3. Drone Strike Said To Kill A Leader Of Al Qaeda By David E. Sanger WASHINGTON A strike by an unmanned drone last week killed a senior commander of Al Qacda who had played a signi?cant role in planning the killing of lCentral Intelligence Agency operatives in late December at a base in 00143 page ti Afghanistan, according to American of?cials. The March ii strike was one of a series aimed at suspected participants in the deadly attack in Khost Province. which took place just before a meeting with a militant who the Americans believed could provide information on Al Qaeda?s operations. Seven Americans and a Jordanian intelligence officer died in that attack. According to a United States of?cial. the Qacda operative killed last week was Hussein til-Yemeni. The drone missile struck in Miram Shah in North Waziristan. a pan of Pakistan where Al Qaeda is considered well dug in. The official. who spoke on the condition of anonymity. described Mr. Yemeni as an ?Al Qacda planner and facilitator" in his late 205 or early 305. who had established ties with the Haqqani network. which has planned many Taliban attacks in Afghanistan. and with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. His role was described by one American official as a ?conduit in Pakistan for funds. messages and recruits. but his real specialty was bombs and suicide operations." It was unclear exactly what role Mr. Yemeni might have played in preparing the Jordanian double-agent. Humam Khalil Abu Mulal al-Balawi. also known as Humam Khalil Mohammad, for his meeting in Khost on Dec. 30. Mr. Balawi was not searched when entering the compound. and detonated his suicide vest just before he was to be patted down ahead of his meeting with a number of CLA. of?cials. In an unusual statement. a senior intelligence of?cial told reporters the deaths would be ?avenged through successful. aggressive operations." The drone attacks are part of a covert program that American of?cials of?cially refuse to talk about. but whose arcs. EXHIBIT it Map) K?s r374 :55 ll?. ManningB_?O409593 existence is an open secret. Last year there were roughly 55 drone attacks in Pakistan against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. based on news reporting about the damage they caused. The attacks are a key element of an effort to put pressure on Al Qaeda and its leadership. but in recent weeks they appear to have been used to kill those believed responsible for the Khost attack. In a speech last week in Oklahoma. the C.I.A. director. Leon Panetta. said he believed that the pressure on Al Qaeda had grown so much in recent months that the leadership of its traditional hierarchy, including Osama bin Laden. had been greatly diminished. He said recent communications intercepts had overheard younger militants complaining about the absence of leadership. At the end of the Bush administration. intelligence of?cials made similar claims. At the same time. some otlicials concede. an operation as complex as that in Khost demonstrates that Al Qacda and the Taliban can still carry out sophisticated terror actions. Washington Post March 18. 20?) Pg. [0 4. Attacks Searing In Afghanistan Taiibmr?ghters' low-ted: but deadly tactic hinders US. By Craig Whitlock Taliban ?ghters more than doubled the number of homemade bombs they used against US. and NATO forces in Afghanistan last year. relying on explosives that are often far more primitive than the ones used in Iraq. The embrace of a low-tech approach by Taliban-trained bombmakers -- they are building improvised explosive devices. or lEDs. out of licrtilimr and diesel fuel has stymied a $17 billion U.S. against the devices in Iraq and ManningB_ClO409694 Afghanistan. military officials say. Electronic scanners or which were commonly deployed in Iraq. can detect only bombs with metal parts or circuitry. "Technology is not going to solve this problem." said Anny Lt. Gen. Michael Oates. director of the military?s Joint IED Defeat Organisation. or JIEDDO. don't think you can defeat the IED as a weapon system. It is too easy to use." U.S. military officials said they expected the number of IED attacks to climb further this year as 40.000 U.S. and NATO reinforcements pour into Afghanistan. Gates said technological advances have enabled the military to save lives by providing better armor and other forms of protection for troops. But he said the high-tech approach -- despite billions of dollars in research -- has failed to produce an effective way to detect IE.le in the ?eld. About of the devices that are found be fore they explode are detected the old-fashioned way: by troops who notice telltale signs. such as a recently disturbed patch of dirt that might be covering up a bomb. Despite the insurgents' crude approach. the explosive power of their 11305 is growing. Each bombing in Afghanistan. on average. causes 50 percent more casualties than it did three years ago. Gates said Wednesday at a House committee hearing. US. of?cials say even armored troop-camped vehicles that were designed to protect against roadside bombs are now vulnerable. All told. the US. military recorded H.159 IED incidents in Afghanistan in 2009. compared with 3,867 in 2008 and 2.677 the year before. Last month. 3'21 IEDs blew up or were defused in Afghanistan. slowing a major Marinenled offensive in Helmand province and killing 28 LLS. and allied troops. These bombs are the leading cause of U.S. casualties by a large margin. The number of attacks in Iraq. meanwhile. has plummeted. mirroring the overall decrease in violence in that country. At their peak. in 200?. Iraqi insurgents employed 23.0th IEDs. Last year, that number fell to about 3.000. according to U.S. military ?gures. Oates credited U.S. countermeasures such as interrupting the ?ow of military-grade explosives and detonators from Iran for some of the decrease. Other military of?cials said a bigger factor was the overall reduction in the intensity of the insurgency; as sectarian ?ghting faded. people simply stopped planting bombs. Maj. Gen. Michael T. Flyrui. the head of U.S. military intelligence in Afghanistan. has said that the most effective way to combat the flood of IEDs is to embrace an overall strategy. If U.S. and NATO forces can win the support of the local population. the thinking goes. the bombings will stop. But with the number of attacks soaring in Afghanistan. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates created a task force in November to devise more short-term solutions for responding to the threat. He gave the group six months to come up with recommendations. "There?s no doubt the urgency has picked up." said Oates. who took over as director of JIEDDU in Jannary and sits on the task force. "We don?t have years to wait to start changing the momentum in Afghanistan." HEDDO. which has a staff of about 3.500. was created in EUUE after 11.5. commanders in Iraq said they needed a major research effort to come up with ways to ?ght Some military of?cials likened the campaign to a modern-day Manhattan Project. the code HIV. 00144 page 9 name for the secret program that developed the ?rst atomic bomb. Congress has spent nearly billion on IED research and training programs. not including money allocated for armored vehicles and other equipment to protect troops. In Iraq. in addition to using electronic the US. military employed a range of tactics to detect IEDs. Unmanned aircraft and blimps armed with cameras roamed the skies to look for insurgents as they placed bombs along roadsides and under bridges. But experts said those tactics are only marginally useful in Afghanistan. Because of the country's moumainous terrain. surveillance drones have a harder time spotting bombers at work. Unlike in Iraq. most of the roads are unpaved. making it more dif?cult to detect bombs buried in the dirt. "It's just a tough environment." said Command Sgt. Maj. Todd M. Burnett. who oversees training programs for IIEDDO. "It's the harshest conditions imaginable for a soldier." Kenneth Comer. JIEDDO's deputy director of intelligence. said insurgents in Afghanian and Iraq were constantly adapting their bombmaking tactics to stay a step ahead of technological advances. He Said that it was unlikely that the US. military would ever catch up but that it needed to keep trying until broader counterinsurgency efforts take root. The alternative. he said. would result in higher U.S. casualties and more momentum for enemy forces. "We will never win in that space." he said. "But we can lose in that space." AnnyTimes.com March 1120?) 5. Lays Out Campaign For Kandahar DFCR. EXHIBIT it I pg Cd. By William H. McMichacl. Staff writer Efforts to lay political and security groundivork in the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar have already begun. even as the U.S.?lcd coalition continues efforts to pacify Marjah. the US. general leading the effort said Wednesday. Both goals are key to the Dbama administration's campaign to secure Afghanistan and establish credible governance. The campaign to remove the Taliban from Kandahar won?t take the form of last month's D?day-style military movement into Marjah. to the east in neighboring Helmand province. but will be a gradual buildup that employs both military force and political maneuvers, said Army Gen. Stanley commander of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, dining a satellite-linked meeting with Pentagon reporters. ?What you are going to see in the months ahead without giving too much detail is a number of activities to shape the political relationships in and around Kandahar.? said. ?As you know. it's a complex. grouping of tribes and other relationships that de?ne how power is shared in Kandahar." This process has become ?*very damaged? in the past few years. said. ?So one of the things we?ll be doing is working with political leaders to try to get an outcome that makes sense. That will then be supported by security operations and that will. in some cases. be increased partnering inside the city with the Afghan National Police. We intend to put more forces in there to give better presence and better support to their internal security." said he has already increased coalition forces around Kandahar. and will "continue to increase Afghan National Security Forces and coalition forces in ManningB_00409695 the months ahead.? The provincial capital has recently been struck by Taliban bemb attacks described as a ?warning? to killing or wounding more than 90 civilians. the Associated Press reported. In congressional testimony this week. acknowledged. as did Army Gen. David Petraeus. chief of US. Central Command. that more trainers are needed to help increase Afghan National Security Forces capabilities. "We have been very unequivocal back both to Washington. DC. and of course. more appropriately. to said. The number of trainers in country has been increased ?signi?cantly.? he said. as have moves linking coalition and Afghan forces. all efforts to develop the Afghan force. But to produce quality trainees at the desired rare. he said. ?we need additional trainers." said he was ?pleased? with the progress made to date in Marjah. ?But I would also say that We are just really still in the back end of the military phase of this. and that the longer-term phases where we?ve got to establish credible Afghan govemance is a signi?cant task in front of us. acknowledged full awareness of the July ll. EDI l. date Obama has set for the beginning of the withdrawal of US. forces from Afghanistan, but said. as have sevch US. of?cials. that ?the scope and the rate" of withdrawal ?will be based upon conditions." He added his belief that enough trained and capable Afghan National Security Forces will be in place at that point to provide increasing security where they are stationed around the country. Reuterscom March 18. 2010 6. US Troops Leave Border To Afghan Boss Accused Of Graft By Peter Ciralf. Reuters SPIN EOLDAK. Afghanistan One of the most important trade routes in Asia was closed last week while a boyish-looking man everyone calls "the general" showed around the commander of US. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. General Stanley to the top of a roof. where "the general" -- of?cially a colonel in the Afghan Border Police -- pointed out the area where NATO forces plan to build a new $20 million border station. U.S. forces are not allowed near the teeming border when it is open. so they have never seen quite how Colonel Abdul Razziq, the 3D-something Afghan border police boss in Spin Boldak. single~handedly rules over billions in international trade. They say he has done a good job keeping the border moving and secure. They also believe he is. as one senior military official put it. "a crook". Or. as Lieutenant-Colonel Pat Keane. head of a NATO unit trying to improve Afghanistan's border controls. put it more delicately: "He keeps the peace down here. Trucks ?ow. commerce ?ows. At the same time. he is getting additional incomes." visit to Razziq at least his second so far this year -- shows the tough choices U.S. of?cials face trying to fight corruption in Afghanistan. while relying on of?cials they believe arc themselves eon'upt. For now Razziq is the Americans' man in Spin Boldak. where US. forces expect him to help them dramatically increase their own shipments of supplies for their growing military presence. Rarziq. a leader of one of the two main tribes in the border area of Kandahar province. commands a few thousand local policemen in blue-grey uniforms at the Hit. arcs. EXHIBIT .l 1 mi?) 00145 page It) frontier. one of only two legal highway crossing points between Afghanistan and Pakistan. A man with an easy smile and a friendly air who denies illegal activity. Razziq beamed beside the US. commander as praised him in front of local teleVision cameras. "Colonel Razziq is trying to make some changes that allow battle to move more smoothly.? said. am very optimistic that with the plans that I've heard. we can increase efficiency and decrease corruption." Just how much pro?t Razziq makes from his total control of the border is impossible to gauge. About 700 trucks cross the frontier each day, linking Pakistan with southern Afghanistan. Iran and central Asia beyond. During a brie?ng with and his top aides before the trip to meet Rarziq. the head of Afghan customs. Bismullah Kamrnawie. told the American officers that corruption at Razziq's border post was "total". The Afghan government colleCIs about $40 million in customs revenue in Kandahar Province per year. about a fifth of what it should collect. Kammawic told Reuters. adding that the target was just an estimate since nobody really knows what comes in. Razziq and his men control one of the main outgoing routes from the southern Afghan agricultural heartland that produces nearly all the world's illegal opium. A 1500 word investigative story in Harper?s Magazine last year. which included interviews with Fashion drug traders and smugglers on both sides of the header. described Razziq as controlling an empire worth millions in annual kickbacks. It described his own lavish compound, ?lled with armoured vehicles. and said he runs a network of private prisons for those who cross '11Crti?: PC: him. According to the Washington Post. the Harper's story is being used to teach US. intelligence agents about the reality on the ground in Afghanistan. Yet despite their clear suspicions. U.S. forces have so far agreed essentially to give Razziq a free hand. Under a deal reached on the grourid. US. troops in the area have pledged not to visit the border when it is open. One of the aims of visit was to sign a document that would allow his troops unfettered access. No luck. After a two-hour meeting full of speeches on the importance of cooperation. Razziq and his boss from Kabul. border police commander Mohammad Younus Noorvai, politely declined to sign in the absence of two cabinet ministers. With 30,000 additional US. troops arriving as part of President Barack Obama's escalation strategy this year -- most to Kandahar and neighbouring areas -- NATO will need to double its own supply traf?c through Spin Boldak in coming months. They need Razziq to keep the border open longer so more traf?c can pass. They will also have to deal with other of?cials they say they have questions about. above all the head of Kandahar's provincial council. President Hamid Kamai's half-brother Ahmad Wall Karzai. considered the most power?rl roan in the province. Ahmad Wali Kamai has long denied Western media reports that he is involved in the drug trade- The New York Times also reported last year that he was on the CIA's payroll. Being so closely allied to of?cials they suspect of graft makes military commanders uncomfortable. but they are wary of disrespecting the Afghan authorities they are there to protect. Last week. NATO of?cials made clear they would not intervene despite learning that the man chosen to run Marjah. a town US. Marines fought for last month. may have spent four years in a German prison for attempting to stab his stepson to death. In an interview after meeting Razziq. McClu'ysral said ?ghting corruption is crucial because it is what drives Afghans into the arms of insurgents. But he declined to address speci?c accusations against Razziq and Ahmad Wali "To the degree that (corruption) is one of the causes of the insurgency. it worries me more than the insurgency itself." said. "We can ?ght the insurgency: we can defeat the forces of the insurgency. the ground forces and whatnot. But if we don't have effective governance. credible governance. than you don't defeat the cause of the insurgency." Before his trip to see Razziq. listened as staff doscribed plans for the new $20 million customs depot. "This is what we're good at: building stuff and projects." said. "We're not so good at the cultural stuff" Philadelphia Inquirer March 18.2011) 7. Cancels Afghan Debt The United States has reached an agreement with other countries to cancel $1.6 billion in debt owed by Afghanistan to creditor nations and international lending organizations. Deputy U.S. Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin said yesterday that the decision to cancel the debt was a recognition of the progress Afghanistan had made in strengthening its economy. "Lifting the debt burden inherited by the Afghan government marks a crucial step on Afghanistan's road to economic sustainability." Wolin said. The Treasury said that since 2002. technical advisers worked with the Afghan Ministry of Finance to help restructure the debt. The accord covets not only debt owed by Afghanistan to the United States and other individual countries but also loans extended by the lntemational Monetary Fund and World Bank. Treasury officials said that about $1le million of the debt was owed to the United States. Associated Press Washington Post March 13.2010 Pg. 8. CIA Director Says Attacks Have Al-Qaeda Landsat deep in hiding: credits c?ortr with Pakistan By Joby Warriek and Peter Finn Aggressive attacks against al-Qaeda in Pakistan's tribal region have driven Osama bin Laden and his top deputies deeper into hiding and disrupted their ability to plan sophisticated operations. CIA Director Leon Panetta said Wednesday. So profound is aI-Qacda's disarray that one of its lieutenants. in a recently intercepted message. pleaded with bin Laden to come to the group's rescue and provide some leadership. Panetta said. He credited improved coordination with Pakistan's government and what he called "the most aggressive operation that CIA has been involved in in our history." offering a near-acknowledgment of what is of?cially a secret war. "Those operations are seriously disrupting al~Qacda." Panctta said. "It's pretty clear from all the intelligence we are getting that they are having a very dif?cult time putting together any kind of command and control. that they are scrambling. And that we really 00146 page i I do have them on the run." Panetta is one of several senior of?cials who have stepped forward to argue that the administration is making gains against extremists. in part to rebut Republican criticism that President Obama has weakened national security. He is not the ?rst 1A director to point to progress in the war against al-Qacda. claims that sometimes prove too ambitious. have an excellent idea of where [bin Laden] is." then-CIA Director Porter J. (loss told an interviewer in 2005. Senior Obama administration of?cials this week have given sharply different views on how bin Laden would be dealt with if he fell into LLS. hands. Gen. Stanley A. the commander of 1.1.5. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. said Wednesday that the military would "certainly" try to capture bin Laden alive and "bring him to justice." A day earlier. Anomcy General Eric H. Holder Jr. told a congressional panel that bin Laden would never go on trial in the United States because the chances of him being caught alive are "in?nitesimal." He predicted ?atly that bin Laden will be killed -- either by U.S. forces or by al-Qaeda operatives determined to prevent him from being captured. Panetta said the agency has a plan in the event that a top al-Qaeda leader is captured. "The most likely scenario is you bring them to a military facility. and we would then do the questioning" there. he said. A steady toll on al-Qaeda Reflecting on his 13 months at the helm of the CIA. Panetta made no prediction about the fate of the man who has eluded a worldwide manhunt for nine years. But he said the combined U.S.-Pakistani campaign is taking a steady toll in terms of al-Qaeda leaders killed and captured, and is undercutting the group's ability to coordinate -.. . ti" Hotl?ll I i kw A8 lli'fll I ManningB_00409696 I a attacks outside its base along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. To illustrate that progress. intelligence of?cials revealed new details of a March it killing of a top aI-Qacda commander in the militant stronghold of Miram Shah in North Waziristan. in Pakistan's autonomous tribal region. The al-Qaeda of?cial died in what local news reports described as a missile strike by an unmanned aerial vehicle. In keeping with long-standing practice, the of?cials spoke on the condition of anonymity because the formally declines to acknowledge U.S. participation in attacks inside Pakistani territory. Hussein al~Yemeni. the man killed in the attack. was identi?ed by one intelligence of?cial as among al-Qaeda's top EU leaders and a participant in the planning for a Dec. 30 suicide bombing at a CIA base in the province of Khost in custom Afghanistan. The bombing. in which a Jordanian double agent gained access to the CIA base and killed seven of?cers and contractors. was the deadliest single blow against the agency in a quarter-century. Panetta's upbeat remarks contrasted with recent intelligence assessments of continuing terrorist threats against the US. homeland. But he also said al-Qaeda will continue to look for ways to strike inside the United States. and he noted that the organization is seeking to recruit people who lack criminal records or known ties to terrorist groups. He cited the recent examples of Najibullah Zazi, an Afghan immigrant who targeted the New York subway system and pleaded guilty to terrorism charges. and Umar Farouk Abdulmutal lab. a Nigerian charged with attempting to detonate explosives on a commercial ?ight about to land in Detroit. "How many other Zazis are there -- the people who halve a clean record who suddenly, for some crusty reason. decide to get involved with jihad?" Panetta said. "The bomber in Detroit -- this person suddenly goes oil", has a US. visa. and within 30 days he's recruited to strap a bomb on and come to this country. What we are seeing is that they are now looking for those kind of clean credentials." Such threats make it all the more necessary to strike al-Qaeda in its home base. Pauetta said. "The president gave us the mission to disnipt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda and their military allies, and I think that's what we are trying to do." Secret strikes Counting the March 8 operation. the CIA is believed to have mounted 22 such strikes this year. putting the agency on coursi: to exceed last year's roughly 53 strikes, a record. The March 8 event is believed to have been the ?rst to occur in an urban area; a LLS. intelligence official familiar with the operation said the building that was targeted housed "a large number of al~Qaeda? ?ghters who were developing explosives. There were no other casualties, the of?cial said. Panetta. while declining to comment on the strike itself. said the death of the avaaeda commander sent a "very important signal that they are not going to be able to hide in urban areas." He also cited recent arrests of top Taliban ?gures most notably Mullah Abdul Ghani Barndar. captured in Karachi in early February -- as tangible evidence of improving ties with Pakistan's intelligence service. He said that Pakistan has given the CIA access to Baradar since his capture and added that "we're getting intell i from the interrogation. A senior intelligence official revealed that Baradar was tracked down as part of a joint operation with Pakistan that targeted members of a Taliban leadership council known as the Quetta Shura. A breakthrough came when the intelligence agencies obtained a list of Taliban phone numbers, one of which led them directly to Baradar, the o?icial said. Panetta said coordination between the CM and its Pakistani counterparts had improved over the past year, despite occasional "Friction based on past history." "Generally we?ve had mach better relationships." he said. "We do a lot more operations together. That's how Estrada: was captured as well as . They have been much more tolerant of the operations we have there." Where is bin Laden? Panetta said the agency does not know precisely where bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri. are hiding, but he said agency of?cials believe the two are inside Pakistan. "either in the northern tribal areas or in North Waziristan. or somewhere in that vicinity." While there have been no continued sightings of either man since 2003. the continued pressure increases the opportunities for catching one or both. Panetta said. "We thought that the increased pressure would do one of two things: that it would either bring them out to try to exnrt some leadership in what is an organization in real trouble. or that they would go deeper into hiding." he said. "And so far we think they are going deeper into hiding." Inside the door of Panetta?s o?ice is a color-coded map of the tribal areas in Pakistan, the only map on a wall decorated with photographs of Panetta's long career in Washington. "You can bet there is going to be a conversation in this of?ce during the day that involves something on that map." he said. Sto?' writer Craig Whirlock and surf researcher Julie Tare contributed to this nynni 00147 page [1 Washingtonpost.com March Il. 2010 9. US Military: Goal Still To Capture Bin Laden Alive By Anne Flaherty, Associated Press WASHINGTON -- The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said Wednesday that it remains the goal of U.S. troops to capture Osama bin Laden alive and "bring him to justice." The comment by Gen. Stanley to reporters was in contrast to remarks made a day earlier by Attorney General Eric Holder. Holder told Congress that the chances of capturing bin Laden alive were "in?nitesimal" because he would probably be killed by US. forces or by one ofhis own ?ghters. Bin Laden's whereabouts have longed vexed U.S. of?cials. But his elusive status has recently taken on new meaning as President Barack Dbama pushes to try suspected terrorists in civilian courts instead of more secretive military tribunals. Congressional Republicans are pushing back by saying that bin Laden and others like him shouldn't be given the same rights as US. citizens. Holder said in House testimony that terrorists wouldn't be given any more rights than serial killers like Charles Manson. He also dismissed the example of bin Laden being given access to U.S. courts as a red herring in the debate. "Let's deal with reality." Holder said. "The reality is that WE will be reading Miranda rights to the corpse of Usama bin Laden. He will never appear in an American When was asked whether the US. had given up on capturing bin Laden alive. he said. "Wow, no.? IHV. arcs. My) @9140935 ManningB_DD409697 If bin Laden enters Afghanistan. "we would certainly go after trying to capture him alive and bring him to justice." told Pentagon reporters from Kabul. think that is something that is understood by everyone." he said. Christian Science Monitor (csmonitorcom) March 17, 2010 10. Al Qaeda Websites Present Growing Threat, 's Mueller Warns By Warren Richey, Staff writer The United States faces an expanding array of AI Qacda-rclatcd threats that extend far beyond the lawless regions of southwest Asia and into the US itsch via radical Islamist websites. FBI Director Robert Mueller told a House Appropriations subcommittee on Wednesday. ?For those in the intelligence community there has been a shift in the degree of concern about affiliates of Al Qaeda growing in strength and presenting a much enhanced threat to the United States." the Federal Bureau of Investigation director said. Prior to the Still attacks. he said, the AI Qacda threat largely resided in or near Afghanistan. Now. however. US intelligence of?cials are monitoring the growth of groups based in Somalia and Yemen. among others. Some 313th] naturalired US citizens currontly reside in Yemen. Mr. said. and intelligence of?cers are attempting to identify if any have been radicaiized. trained, and tasked to return to the US to conduct attacks. In addition. Mueller warned of the threat of Al Qacda supporters emerging within the US domestic population who have grown sympathetic to Al Qacda through contact with militant websites. FBI agents are attempting to head off traditional means of radicalization within American prisons or in small pockets in certain US communities. But Mueller said the hardest to counter is the militant international dialogue underway on pro-AI Qaeda websites. ?The one that is most worrisome is the Internet.? Mr. Mucllertesti?ed. In nearly 2.5 hours of testimony. Mueller also defended the FBI 's interrogation of alleged Christmas bomber Ulnar Abdulmutallab. and he revealed the Obama administration's plans to deploy a high-value terrorist interrogation team within the domestic US. 011 Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder was grilled by Republican members of the same House subcommittee for failing to Mr. Abdulmutallab as an enemy combatant. Administration critics say that rather than giving him Miranda warnings about his right to remain silent and obtain a lawyer. the alleged terrorist should have been turned over for inde?nite military detention and interrogation by members ofthe newly formed high?valuc terrorist team. Mueller disagreed. believe that the special agent in charge and the agents on the ground [in Detroit] did an admirable job," he said. ?We could have brought in more subject-matter experts but they were not readin available on the ground at that time.? The FBI director said that sometimes the best opportunity to obtain statements born a suspect is immediately following the arrest. ?You have to act relatively quickly." he said. Mueller said officials on the scene turned to an experienced FBI interrogator who had served in the Middle East. They also brought in an explosives expert to participate in the questioning. Abdulmutallab was initially talkative. providing important details. of?cials have said. But later. after he was read his Miranda rights, he stopped talking. Rep. Frank Wolf of Virginia said Abdulmutallab should have been placed in military detention long enough to allow interrogation specialists to fly to Detroit to question him. ?We are not saying the agent] who drew the short straw to work in Detroit on Christmas Day was a bad person.? he said. He jost wasn?t the best quali?ed in the country to perform the job at hand. Representative Wolf said. The FBI director said the agents used their skills and expertise to good effect. could not get an expert on Nigerian radicalism there that fast.? he said. In such cases. it is necessary to rely on the judgment and ability of of?cials on the scene. he said. Mueller said he would have liked having the high-value interrogation team in Detroit, and he said the administration is currently developing guidelines to cover USnbascd interrogation sessions by the group. Wolf complained that the administration had announced the creation of the interrogation team seven months ago. but that it won?t be operational at the national counterterrorism center until August. Los Angeles Times March I8, 20:0 Pg. I 11. Iraqi Vote Strips Away Unity The still-right race dashes hopes that the notion might conquer its sectarian divide. By Ned Parker BAGHDAD With more than 80% ofthe votes rallied in Iraq's parliamentary elections and the race still neck and neck. hopes that the country might move beyond its deep Shiite-Sunni divide appear to rt' ll?cuj l- page [3 be fading in a stew of sectarian politics. Prime Minister Nomi Maliki. who once campaigned as a nationalist leader responsible for restoring security to all Iraqis. is now falling back on his Shiite Muslim religious identity to position himself against challenger lyad Allawi. a secular Shiite popular with the minority Sunni Arab population. Maliki's allies contend that he is the only acceptable choice for the country's Shiite majority, which suffered under the rule of Saddam Hussein and members of his Sunni-dominated Baath Party. If Allawi is defeated in coming negotiations to form a government. it would be seen as a major setback for Sunnis. who have viewed the national elections as a chance to regain some of the privileges lost when Hussein was toppled in the EUUJ U.S.-lcd invasion of Iraq. Willi most of the March '3 vote results in. Maliki's slate leads in six provinces in the Shiite-dominated south and remains narrowa ahead in religioust m'nicd Baghdad. Allawi's slate appears to have won in five northern provinces with large Sunni populations that were once hotbeds of the Sunni-led insurgency. A stable government is seen as vital to the future of Iraq as the nation prepares For the departure of American combat troops by the end of August and all US. forces by the end of 2011. Its last national elections. in January ZIIUS. which Sunnis largely boycotted. helped ignite a civil war in which Sunni Arab insurgents fought against militias backed by the Shiite-dominated Some say the current election ?ght could push the sides back to that cm i Sunnis again I?ch marginalized and take up arms. Last fall when Maliki. seeking a second term as prime minister, announced his State of Law coalition, he boasted a collection of prominent Shiite and Sunni ?gures. The alliance sought to build upon his success in January 2009 provincial elections. when Maliki campaigned as a nationalist ?gure who had restored public safety for all sects. But an increase in deadly bombings since August. and a round of disquali?eations of election candidates because of their alleged ties to the Heath Party. has returned him to his earlier role as a conservative Shiite. Tire Sunni population voted in droves for Allawi's Iraqiya slate. which included well-known Sunni lamnakers Usama Naja? and Vice President Tariq Hashimi, both of whom are seen as protectors of the Sunni community and the professional and business class under Hussein. Now. with Malilti's slate leading in more provinces and swapping leads with Allawi in the popular vote. the prime minister's associates have been playing the sectarian card. labeling Allawi?s coalition as anti~Shiite and closing ranks based on sect. Maliki has also accused the other side of Fraud. a charge Western of?cials say is unsubstantiated. In doing so. Maliki?s coalition is following the example of Allawi. who voiced similar concerns even before the vote. "Most people understand the lraqiya list has many Baathists," Sami Askari. a senior adviser to Maliki. said Monday, predicting that the country's influential Shiite clergy would never endorse a government headed by those with perceived links to the Hussein era. Askari also claimed that lraqis saw Allawi's list as backed by Saudi Arabia. a largely Sunni country that many Iraqi Shiites view as irrevocably hostile. Those in Maliki's circle insist that the prime minister post must go to a Shiite with proper religions credentials. "[yad [Allawi] is Shiite but he is representing the Sunnis. This will rule him out." said Maliki ally Erna! Shabandar. a onetime lawmaker who left Allawi's parliamentary bloc last year. disillusioned with the former prime minister's autocratic decisi0n~making style. Already. pressure is building for Shiite toes of Malilti to support him for a second term for sectarian reasons, according to Shahandar. Leaders of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and Shiite cleric .?vluqtada Sadr's political movement loathe Maliki and would like to unseat him. but they know they can never back Allawi. Shabandar said. am sure the marjaiyah [Shiite clergy] will support Maliki." he said. adding that Shiite politicians have been visiting Shiite clerical leaders in Najaf?. who are seen as the protectors of Iraq's Shiite faithful. He said the clerics have started to let it be known that the Islamic Supreme Council should avoid opposing Maliki so as not to endanger the majority sect. "If there is a possibility for Heath to in?ltrate power. it is through Allawi." Shabandar said. Maliki also now appears likely to receive the backing of neighboring Iran. a Shiite nation with close ties to the prime minister's Shiite opponents. Shabandar said. Iran. loathed by Iraq?s Sunni Arabs. had opposed Maliki's earlier efforts to break army from the other Shiite religious parties. but it sees him as a lesaer evil than Allawi, Shabandar said. Maliki appears to have no qualms about crafting a less inclusive governing coalition than in 2006. when Sunnis. Shiites and Kurds were all awarded ministries under the supervision of the US. Even hopes for a variety of Kurdish voices in Baghdad has diminished. as a rival Kurdish faction. called Change, fared poorly against the main Kurdish bloc for seats in parliament. "The government of cunrpromise and quota is ?nished. We are going toWard a parliamentary majority." Shabandar said. "There is a difference between the state and the government. The Sunnis will get what they deserve in the . When there is a Kurdish-Shiite coalition. it doesn?t mean there are no Sunnis in it." Iraq's Sunnis view the possibility of Allawi's defeat with fear. "The future will be very black for the Sunnis." said a former insurgent who identi?ed himself as Abu Ahmed. He worries that a govenrment with minimal Sunni participation will lead to security crackdowns. "Maliki has this path some with me or I'll exclude you.? the former insurgent said. Washington Post March 18. 2010 Pg. 8 12. Vote Accentuates Iraq?s Deep Splits Mar?iki, Allowr' In Tight Battle: Smell o/?sct?rorionism is flowng around again By Leila Fade] BAGH DAD -- The emerging results from last week's parliamentary elections have made clear that Iraq remains a dangeroust polarized nation. with deep regional and sectarian schisms that could widen as the US. military draws down. The race to become Iraq's next prime minister is so tight that it remains unclear who will come out ahead. The country is caught between two men: Ayad Allawi. a secular Shiite who became the candidate of choice for Sunni Arabs. and incumbent Nouri al-Malilti. an Islamist Shiite who has recast himself as a nationalist while still promising to serve the I i ll '1 I DFCR. page l4 once-oppressod Shiite majority. No matter which man's slate wins more seats. diplomats and Iraqi of?cials say the post-election jockeying to build a governing coalition could give rise to new con?icts in Iraq's Shiite-dominated south and the Sunni-dominated west. with the potential to unravel hard-won security gains. With US troop levels set to dip to about 50.ll{ltl by the end of the summer. the elections appear likely to give rise to an Iraq even more sharply divided than in the recent past. with Islamist Shiites trying to maintain their control in the government and Sunni Arabs hoping to assert a louder voice. albeit with a Shiite at the helm. "Already the smell of sectarianism is [lowing around again." Allawi said in an interview last week with The Washington Post. Many Sunnis view Allawi. a former prime minister. as a potential benevolent dictator who could repair Iraq's tenuous relationship with Arab neighbors. Among ordinary Shiites. Maliki's popularity is such that be attracted more votes than any other parliamentary candidate. But as a politician. Maliki has many enemies and few loyal friends. which could complicate the task of forming the new governing coalition he needs to stay on as prime minister. He broke with Iraq?s largest Shiite political grouping to reinvent himself as a nationalist and now faces mistrust among many Shiites. Maliki's biggest Shiite rivals are the followers of fiery cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. who have long walked a ?ne line between politics and violence. The Sadrists could become the dominant Voice in the second?largest Shiite bloc in the parliament. This could make Maliki's attempt to form a new government pain?rl both politically and possibly through violence in the streets(P) With more than 30 percent of votes counted in lraq. the regional and sectarian split has been stark. Allawi holds leads in the four mostly Sunni provinces in the west and north, including a decisive lead in Anbar province. once the bastion of the Sunni insurgency. in those Sunni areas. Malilci has attracted little support. Allawi also is ahead in the battleground province of Tamim. where Kurds. Arabs and Turkmens all claim the capital. Kirkulr. But in Baghdad. the capital. .?v?laliki is still leading. and he continues to lead in six of the nine southern provinces where Shiites hold a large majority. and where Allawi's slate is doing poorly. Both Maliki and Allawi are trying to Woo the Kurds and form a coalition that will ultimately appoint the president. who will then the largest bloc in parliament the ?rst chance to form a government and choose the prime minister. But for both men. the path is ?lled with obstacles. lfMaliki. a divisive ?gure whom many former allies describe as authoritarian and in some cases duplicitous. wins the plurality in parliament but proves unacceptable to most rival blocs. it would mean months of political maneuvering that could spill into the streets and spark bloodshed. In Iraq. violence has hiatorically been the ultimate card in politics. "Remember. the south challenged Saddam [Hussein] with all of his powers." Sadiq alsRikabi. a top adviser to Maliki. said Wednesday. referring to the l99l Shiite uprising. He spoke about concerns of Fraud by rivals as the votes were being counted. "Our people are still suffering in the south. and they are patient for one reason: Their rights in Baghdad will be protected.? It is unclear whether Maliki would accept a defeat quietly and walk aWay. Top of?cials in his State of Law bloc Warn that there will be "chaos" if election results are not transparent and that Maliki will stay in his position until every vote is manually recounted. While Maliki has a cohesive political bloc. the resistance to him among other Shiite groups means that many may ?nd it dif?cult to strike a deal that would leave him as prime minister. For now. Maliki's bloc has closed ranks around him. but its members may ultimately have to decide whether to stick with him if it means risking control of the government. The Sadrists. projected to win 35 to 40 seats in the 325-seat parliament. have said in the past that they considered Maliki treacherous for his strike against them in 2008. when he went after their militia and arrested tens of men in the southcm city of Basra. The militia was seen as a major player in much of the sectarian violence that paralyzed Iraq. Maliki is leading in oil-rich Basra province. A Sadr movement oflicial who spoke on the condition of anonymity said the group's resurgent power meant that Maliki and his party could no longer act alone. "They are not the majority." the official said. "If they want to have the title of prime minister. they have to listen to others. not put their conditions on others." But an alliance betWeen Sadrists and Allawi may prove just as dif?cult, The former prime minister has allied himself with Sunni Arabs whom most Shiites and Kurds would consider unacceptable. His party has also been the focus of a controversial commission. run by Shiite candidates. that purged tens of candidates belonging to his list for alleged loyalties to Hussein's outlawed Baalh Party. The move galvanized Sunni voters. but it alienated some of Allawi?s smaller. Shiite constituency. Ultimately, Allawi's popularity as the man for Sunni Arabs in Iraq could be his undoing. "It's more or less an unwritten dictum that this post for prime minister should be for the Shiites." said Erzat Shahbandar. a Shiite lawmaker and member of Maliki's political bloc. "Although Allawi is a Shiite. he is a candidate from a Sunni electorate. Correspondent Ernesto Londth contributed to this report. St. Louis PoslvDispatch March 17. 2010 Pg. 1 13. McCaskill Turns Up Heat On Earmarks. Pentagon Requesrfor data is par! of drive by Congress to curb special} projects. By Bill Lambrecht WASHINGTON - Sen. Claire McC'askill is pressing the Pentagon to release records on billions of dollars in defense projects awarded through congressional earmarks. part of a growing move to restrict lawmakers' practice of directing expensive projects back home to their districts and states. A year to the day alter her ?rst demand for Pentagon documents. McCaskill. said Tuesday that she had grown increasingly frustrated with the agency's refusal to comply. Pentagon of?cials have provided sketchy information on a fraction of recent congressional-directed awards for military spending, and McCaskill has received nothing from military of?cials in more than six months. she said. McCaskill. who chairs a Senate subcommittee on contracting oversight. said one of her aims was tabulating the number of no?hid contracts awarded to companies at the behest of powerful members of Congress. "I'm trying to be patient, page 15 but I?m not giving up." she said. feel a little like the dog that caught its tail." McCaskill said she intended to telephone Pentagon of?cials shortly and also was considering holding a public hearing. Another option would be for her committee to sitpr the documents. Steve Ellis. vice president of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. said the Pentagon budget directed more earmarks to for-pro?t companies than any other federal agency. But taxpayers rarely know which companies get the awards and have no input in evaluating companies' performances. he said. Pentagon of?cials did not immediately respond to requests for comment. McCaskiIl?s efforts are part of a renewed drive in Congress to curb the use of earmarks, which added more than $30 billion to the federal budget over the past We years. Last week. House Democrats banned the use of earmarks that would be directed to for-pro?t entities in the new budget. A day later. House Republicans went a step further by committing the GOP to a one-year ban on all earmarks. And McCasl-till co-sponsored an amendment that would in effect ban earmarks for two years by requiring an extraordinary two-thirds majority to pass any legislation containing pet projects. But Tuesday evening. the Senate demonstrated its fondness for earmarks by voting more than to kill the proposed two-year ban. However. the Senate did approve an amendment ctr-sponsored by McCaskill to cancel ?mding for an estimated $600 million for highway projects obtained by earmarks a decade or more ago but not yetbuilt. By all accounts. the quostion of earmarks is shaping up as a political issue this election year. Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan. the Democrats' Eifi-iilli it Mannin 00409700 . pi I - L?k?lg ?r likely candidate for Missouri's opening Senate seat. responded last week to the new earmarks prohibitions by saying Congress should "ban them all.?I Previously. she had committed only to reforming the earmarks process. "There's on accountability about how money is being spent." she added later in an interview. "The only people who like earmarks are the politicians who give them out and the lobbyists who help get them." The issue lends itself to Carnahan?s drive to paint hcr5elf as the outsider in the Senate election. Like many in Congress. Rep. Roy Blunt. R-Spring?eld. her likely opponent in November. has made use of earmarks. He helped secure more than $20 million for several Missouri projects last year. among them defense-related awards for companies in his southwestern Missouri district. After the GDP caucus adopted its oncryear ban. Blunt said he would sponsor a Spending reduction in Congress roughly equivalent to the last two years of local-project awards. A spokeswoman said last week that he would abide by the House GOP ban; he was unavailable Tuesday for comment. Carnahan and Blunt are competing to replace Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond. who is retiring. Bond. a Republican. has relied heavily on earmarks during his four terms in of?ce. Bond defends earmarks as a means by which Congress. rather than the government. can oversee taxpayers? money. His of?ce said Tuesday: "All discretionary money gets earmarked by someone - either by an elected of?cial in Congress or an unclectcd one within the bureaucracy. Right now. about 93 percent of the money is unmarked by bureaucrats." Defense Daily March Is. 2010 14. Navy Stands By LCS Due Date As Hill Backers 0f Each Bidder Swap Barbs By Emelie Rutherford Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said yesterday the service is keeping a mid-April deadline for industry bids on the Littoral Combat Ship amid concerns about the losing shipbuilder protesting the contract award and a call from one side to delay the schedule. Some observers predict the loser of the two-way contest between Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics teams. which have each built early LESS. will protest the Navy's contract award to government auditors. The service has set an April 12 date for the two industry teams in the contest to build the next ll) littoral ships. The Navy also plans to allow additional shipbuilders to compete to build future versions of the selected ship design. Sen. Richard Shelby (ll-Ala.) made an unsuccessful request to the Navy during a budget hearing yesterday to delay the April 12 due date for LCS proposals until the Congressional Budget Of?ce provides a requested assessment. He supports General Dynamics' bid to build it) all-aluminum trimaran LCSs at Mobile. Ala-based Austal USA. Shelby joined other Alabama lawmakers March It in requesting the CBO investigate the total lifeeyclc costs of the LCSs. They argue the LCS request for proposals does not address "critical factors" related to the total-ownership costs and technical capabilities of the two competing designs. and claim Lockheed Martin?s ship would have higher Iifeeycle operating costs than General Dynamics' aluminum version. "I?m concerned. Mr. Secretary about ef?ciency. which is a big cost." Shelby said yesterday during a Senate Appropriations Defense subcommittee hearing on the Navy and Marine Corps' ?scal year 201] budget requests. Shelby charged if the is not amended. to include an evaluation factor that considers energy-consumption costs. the ship acquisition would not jibe with Mabus' statements regarding considering energy costs in contracting. Mabus said the LES was designed with total-ownership costs in mind. Fuel savings are shown when the littoral ships are used at very high speeds. and the Navy "very infrequently" plans to use the vessels at such high speeds. the Navy secretary said. Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead reiterated this point to reporters after the hearing. saying there is not a huge divergence in fuel consumption between the two LC classes. Mabus told the panel he stands by "the uncut RFP. which stresses the cost to purchase the ship. so that we can get enough of these ships. "Both variants. we believe. meet every requirement that we have. not only operationally but also in terms of life-cycle costs going forward." he added. Shelby asked the Navy to delay the April 12 due date for LCS bids until the CEO responds to the Alabama lawmakers request for 3 LC review. Mabus after the hearing told reporters the current REP schedule stands. SAC-D member Sen Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) during the hearing countered Shelby's claims that the Lookheed Martin-Marinade Marine semi-planing monohull LCS. built in his state. would cost the Navy more to operate. Kohl charged the General Dynamics LCS has a "radical" design. rendering its operating costs dif?cult to estimate. He also raised concerns about the aluminum LCS. saying the Navy does not traditionally use page lo the metal be implied would not be as stable as steel. "It seems in very real sense that we're comparing apples and oranges." Kohl said about the competing LCS designs. Mabus responded that the Navy does not "foresee any signi?cant issues for either variant? and is focused on keeping down LCS costs down so the service can buy 55 of them. Kohl asked if aluminum ships are more expensive to ?x than steel vessels. because ofa shortage of aluminum-trained welders at shipyards. Mabus. though. said welding for the metals is similar and thus training for aluminum can be arranged. Navy leaders alter the hearing told reporters they have high con?dence in the LCS RFP. Mabus said modifying the RFP would lead to delays that would raise "real concerns" regarding building and ?elding the LCSS when needed. He noted the Navy already extended the due date for proposal by two weeks to answer eonttnetors' questions. "We think both sets of builders have had adequate time to look at this and to get their proposals in in time." Mabus said. Roughead said a protest of the contract decision "would he extraordinarily disruptive to [the] ability of the ?eet to accomplish it missions in the ?xture." AnnyTimes.corn March 2010 Both Sides To Testify At Gay Ban Hearing By William H. MeMichael. Staff writer Thursday's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the ?don?t ask. don?t tell" policy that bars open service by gays the second in six weeks will feature three outside witnesses who are all former commissioned of?cers. arcs. EXHIBIT rm?) Pg l8 Oi llill. ManningE_UO409701 Two were booted out for being gay. and a retired Marine Corps four-star general will testify in favor of keeping the law that bans openly gay service members. At the ?rst hearing. on Feb. 2, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told the committee that they back President Ubama's call for repeal ofthc current law. Their testimony opened the door for congressional Democrats to begin holding hearings on the effect of repeal. Meanwhile. two Gates-directed studies one due in December. another due to Gates at the end of this week will look at the effect of change across the military and. separately. how the Pentagon can ?enforce this law in a fairer manner." in Gates? words. while the longer-term review plays out. Thursday's hearing will give those who attend a chance to hear the view from both sides of the fence. Retired Marine Corps Gen. John ?lack? Shcehan. appearing at the invitation of the committee's Republican staff. has never publicly addressed the issua of gays in the military; by expressing opposition to repeal of the ban. he will join forces with Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway. who told the committee Feb. 25 hearing that he wants to ?keep the law such that it is." The other service chiefs have not expressed outright opposition to repeal. but the top Army and Air Force generals agreed with Conway that making a change during wartime would be disruptive. Former Air Force Maj. Mike Almy and former Navy Lt. j.g. Jenny Kopfstein both lost their careers over the ban on gays and will testify in favor of repeal. Almy?s story is particularly compelling because he says he was "outed" by an improper search of his belongings after rotating out of Iraq. ?The search was conducted without ever once consulting with a lawyer.? Almy told talk show host Rachel Maddow on March 3. ?My private e-mails were forwarded to my commander. who called me into his office and demanded that I give him an explanation. I refused. ?Don?t ask. don?t tell? failed me despite the fact that I lived up to the premises of this law and nevcr disclosed my private life." Almy said. ?Never once in my 13-year career did 1 make a statement to the military that violated ?don?t ask. don?t tell.? Almy earlier appeared on Capitol Hill on March 3 at the invitation of Sen. Joe Lieberman. I~Conn.. and four other senators who have introduced a bill to repeal the ban. in contrast. was openly gay yet deployed twice on a Navy cruiser before her discharge. according to a biography supplied by the Legal Defense Fund. a Washington. D.C.. legal group representing both of the gay veterans and devoted to repeal of the law. Kopfstein graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1999 and. during her ?rst deployment as a surface warfare of?cer aboard the Japan-based cruiser Shiloh, told her commanding officer that she was a lesbian. it was not an effort to get out of the military; as she told the Washington Post in 2005. didn?t want to have to lie about myself." Her commanding ol?cer requested an investigation but nothing happened for a year. and Kopfsteirl underwent a second sis-month deployment on Shiloh in support of the War in Afghanistan. According to SLDN. discharge board was convened 19 months after her initial admission. Both her fortner and current commanding of?cers testi?ed on her behalf. but she lost her commission. Shcehan reached the top rungs of the military during his 35 years of service. Commissioned in 1962. he is a combat veteran of the Vietnam War and 199t?s Desert Storm and a recipient of the Silver Star and two Purple Hearts. He capped his career as Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic and commander of U.S. Atlantic Command now U.S. Joint Forces Command. Following his 1997 retireman Shcehan joined Bechtel [ntemationaL an international engineering, construction and project management company. as a senior vice president. He served as special adviser for central Asia for two U.S. defense secretaries. and also sat on former Defense Secretary Donald Rumfeld's Defense Policy Board. from 2901 to 2003. Sheehan is af?liated with an international leadership group. Global Zero. which is dedicated to the elimination of nuclear weapons over the neat quarter-country. DefenseNews.com March 17. 2010 16. Challenges Remain In Battle?eld Contracting By Antonie Boessenkool The Pentagon has made major improvements in how it contracts for "contingency" operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for jobs such as food service. construction. security. translators and logistics. but challenges remain. Pentagon and Govcrrunent Accountability Office (GAO) of?cials told Congress members March 17. The GAO. the auditing arm of Congress. said it recommended how the Pentagon could improve wartime contracting in areas such as providing enough personnel to oversee contractors, screening page 17' host-coimu?y and third-country nationals hired by contractors. and training military personnel on how to work with contractors in the ?eld. has made many recommendations starting in the mid-'90s at addressing each of these challenges." William Solis. director of defense capabilities and management for GAO. told members of the US. House Appropriations defense subcommittee. While the department has implemented some of those recommendations. ?it's been slow to implement others." Those shortcomings include a lack of suf?cient and suf?ciently trained military personnel and civilian employees to oversee contractors day-to-day during wartime operations. For example. in Afghanistan. there was concern the military didn't have people with enough knowledge of trades such as plumbing and electrical wiring to oversee contractors doing those jobs. But. said Shay Assad. Pentagon director of defense procurement and acquisition policy. improvements have been made in wartime contracting. For example. Assad said. the Pentagon has improved on ?lling its requirements for trained contracting of?cer representatives to oversee contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the last year. the Pentagon Went from ?lling 59 percent of those slots in Iraq to 94 percent. In Afghanistan. the till rate went from 38 percent in January 2009 to 84 percent in January 2010, he said. One concern raised at the hearing was whether 0.5. contractors and the U.S. military adequately screen host~country nationals and third-country nationals who work for US. contractors. A high proportion of those working for contracting companies hired by the US. military fall into those two categories. According to data IHV. arcs. EXHIBIT prepared by and presented at the heari ng. only 9 percent of contractors in Afghanistan and 28 percent of contractors in iraq are US. citizens. The rest are categorized as thirdcountry nationals or host-country nationals. In Afghanistan. host-country nationals are 75 percent of all contractors. according to While some members of the committee pointed to hiring host-country nationals as a way to stimulate local economies in the ?eld. Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Uhio. said that practice risks security breaches, especially when such hires aren?t adequately screened. "I?m very concerned about the security of our forces." Kaptur said. Although hiring locals may help foster good relationships with local communities, "each one is also a potential for in?ltration and a breach." "It is a concern. and it is a risk." Assad responded. "We are doing what we can do to screen local nationals. but it is a challenge." DefenscN ews.com March 17. 2010 17. Senator Says Solid Rocket Motor Costs Will Double. Navy Disagrees By William Matthews Okay. everyone agrees the cost of solid rocket motors is going up. The question is how much. Sen. David Vitter. insisted again March 1? that the cost of solid rocket motors that the U.S. military needs for its intercontinental ballistic missiles will double if President Bamek Obama gets his way. Vitter blames Oharna's space strategy. as spelled out in the 2011 budget. which would cancel NASA's Constellation program. Constellation is developing the next rocket and crew capsule to take humans into space. The current launch vehicle. the space shuttle. is to retire this year. With Constellation over budget and behind schedule. the Ubama administration favors encouraging private space companies to develop the next generation of launch vehicles. While others praise lUrbarna's plan to invest in commercial space companies. 1 Jitter worries that one of the real losers in all this will be the US. military. His logic: NASA is the nation's biggest customer for solid rocket motors. so if NASA drops out ofthe market. prices for everyone else will double. The military needs solid rocket motors for Minuteman ballistic missiles. submarine-based Trident ballistic missiles. missile interceptors and all sorts of tactical missiles. The Navy. which has studied the matter. says prices will probably rise. but they won?t double. During a Senate Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee hearing, Rear Adm. Stephen Johnson. said he expects solid rocket motor prices to rise 10 to 20 percent. He assured Vitter that till} percent price growth is not likely. Johnson heads Navy strategic systems programs. Viticr. who has been sounding this alarm since the 2011 budget was unveiled Feb. l. socmed unconvinced. NASA provides T0 percent of the business that sustains the solid rocket meter industry. he said. If that vanishes. costs for other customers must increase more than 20 percent. Not so. said Johnson. NASA's requirements are so different from the military's - think size and weight - that eliminating NASA's demand will not cause military rocket costs to double. "it's a valid concern." Johnson told Vitter. And costs may rise. possibly 20 percent. But they won?t double. In other testimony, senior Air Force of?cials said they plan to spend $5.5 billion over the next six years to modernize U.S. bombers. Those are the 3-52. the newest of which is 48 years old; the Bvl. which has been flying since 1986'. and the B-2, which dates to 1993. While upgrading data links. targeting pods and avionics, the Air Force will also begin designing a new bomber that could be manned or unmanned. sopersonic or subsonic. It didn't come up in the subcommittee hearing. but the Air Force has said that the study alone will cost $2 billion to $4 billion a year. with the aim of developing a new bomber by 2020. ArmyTimeseom March 17. 2010 I 18. Personnel Chiefs Warn Against Cuts To Bonuses By Rick Maze. Staff writer Despite meeting all recruiting and retention goals. the service personnel chiefs pleaded with a House panel Wednesday to keep paying enlistment and selective bonuses. lilford Stanley. undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness. said military pay and benefits generally are competitive with the private sector. and that large across-the-board increases are not wanted or needed. ?The state of military compensation is healthy." Stanley told the House Armed Ser?ces Committee?s military personnel panel. ?For the ?rst time. we truly have the ability to target pay with pinpoint accuracy to achieve desired aims and maximize effects of dollars spent." Service of?cials said they may be recruiting and keeping enough people to meet numerical goals and they noted that they are reducing bonus budgets but they worry about Congress cutting too deeply. J: 00153 page ill The Air Force. for example. wants $11.45 million for bonuses in ?scal 2011. said Lt. Gen. Richard Newton. that service's deputy chief of staff for manpower and personnel. ?These pays are critical as we shape the force to meet new and emerging missions and support the combatant commanders in today?s fight.? Newton said. Lt. Gen. Richard Zilmer. the deputy Marine Corps commandant for manpower and reserve affairs. said the Corps also is cutting bonuses but continues to expect to need signi?cant entry bonuses to meet goals for recruits in some critically needed skills. The Army budget for bonuses was $4.9 billion in fiscal 2009 and was reduced to $4.4 billion this year. For 201 l. the Army wants $4.5 billion. an amount that re?ects the cost of anniversary payments for bonuses already signed. said Maj. Gen. Thomas Bostiek. the Army's deputy chief of staff for personnel. New York Times March 18, 2010 19. Pentagon Sees A Threat From Online Muekrakers By Stephanie Strum To the list of the enemies threatening the security of the United States. the Pentagon has added WikiLeaks.org. a tiny online source of information and documents that governments and corporations around the world Would prefer to keep secret. The Pentagon assessed the danger WikiLeaks.org posed to the Army in a report marked ??inautltorized disclosure subject to criminal sanctions.? it concluded that ?WikiLcalts.org represents a potential force protection. counterintelligence. OPSEC and INFOSEC threat to the US. Army" or. in plain English. a threat to Army operations and information. WikiLeaks. true to its ilhltill fl. Help) pg local 35 ManningB_OU409703 mission to publish materials that expose secrets of all kinds, published the 2008 Pentagon report about itself on Monday. Lt. Col. Lee Packnett. an Army spokesman. con?rmed that the report was real. Julian Assangc. the editor of WiltiLcaks. said the concerns the report raised were hypothetical. ?it did not point to anything that has actually happened as a result of the release.? Mr. ASSangc said. ?It contains the analyst's best guesses as to how the information could be used to harm the Anny but no concrete examples of any real harm being done." WikiLcaks. a nonpro?t organization, has rankled governments and companies around the world with its publication of materials intended to be kept secret. For instance. the Army?s report says that in 2008. access to the Web site in the United States was cut off by court order after Bank Julius Baer. a Swiss ?nancial institution. sued it for publishing documents implicating Error in money laundering. grand larceny and tax evasion. Access was restored n?cr two when the bank dropped its case. Governments. including those of North Korea and Thailand. also have tried to prevent access to the site and complained about its release of materials critical of their governments and policies. The Army's interest in WikiLeal-zs appears to have been spurred by. among other things. its publication and analysis of classi?ed and unclassi?ed Army documents containing information about military equipment1 units. operations and ?nearly the entire order of battle" for American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan in April 2007. WikiLcal-rs also published an outdated. unclassi?ed copy of the ?standard operating procedures? at the military prison in Guantanamo Bay. Cuba. WiI-riLeaks said the document revealed methods by which the military prevented prisoners from meeting with the International Red Cross and the use of ?extreme stress? as a means of torture. The Amy's report on WikiLcaks does not say whether WikiLcaks? analysis of that document was accurate. it does charge that some of WikiLeaks?s other interpretation of information is ?awed but does not say speci?cally in what way. The report also airs the Pentagon's concern over some 2.000 pages of documents WikiLcaks released on equipment used by coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Pentagon concluded that such information could be used by foreign intelligence services. terrorist groups and others to identify vulnerabilities. plan attacks and build new devices. WikiLcalts, which Won Amnesty lnternational?s new media award in 2009. almost closed this year because it was broke and still operates at less than its full capacity. It relies on donations from humans rights groups. joumalists. technology buffs and individuals. and Mr. Assangc said it had raised just two-thirds of the 3600.000 needed for its budget this year and thus was not publishing everything it had. Perhaps the most amusing aspect of the Army's report. to Mr. Assange. was its speculation that WikiLeaks is supported by the Central Intelligence Agency. only wish they would step forward with a check ifthat?s the case." he said. San Antonio March 2010 20. In fir-Gathering Of?ce Defended By Guillermo Contreras. Express-News As he bats down allegations that he ran an off-the-books spy operation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. a civilian Defense Department official has been locked out of his of?ce at Lackland AFB and remains cautious about who visits him at his San Antonio apartment. in interviews Tuesday and Wednesday with the San Antonio Express-News. Michael D, Furlong. 56. said a report earlier this week in the New York Times incorrectly portrayed the now-suspended program he ran. He denied allegations that he inappropriately diverted millions of dollars for the operation and said his military superiors approved the program. which at one point was supervised by LLS. commanders and a separate NATO command. Furlong is accused of using civilian subcontractors to secretly collect information that later was used to target and kill suspected militants. Furlong claimed Robert Young Pclton who hosted cable W's ?The World's Most Dangerous Places" and was a government subcontractor related to Furlong's program reported ?wild accusations? about him to the as part of a ?vendetta? that stoked the agency to complain to the Defense Department that the program invaded its turf. He contended that CIA of?cials were briefed about the program's concept and a legal opinion was sought that deemed the eventual Operation lawful. But the Pentagon has launched internal and criminal investigations of Furlong and millions of dollars spent on the program. But Pclton said Furlong tricked him and his business partner into believing the program Was meant to gather cultural and political information in Afghanistan and Pakistan. and that Furlong added components to it meant to gather intelligence that could have resulted in people working for his company or suspected militants getting page It?! killed. "No. we're not engaged in a vendetta against Michael Furlong." Pclton said in an interview. He added that Furlong's accusations are an attempt to deflect blame for his own ill-advised actions. Pclton also denied having made any claims to the CIA about Furlong. ?That's a ?gment of Mr. Furlong's quite imaginative paranoia." Pclton said. Furlong said he has been denied access to documents and c-mails he says can verify his story. ?This is not about anything but providing the best force protection we can provide all of those Ell-somethings in t'oxholes.? Furlong said. ?it's about saving lives." The Express-News was unable to independently verify many of Furlong's claims because the military also clamped down in light of the investigations. The Defense Deparnnent said it was investigating the allegations in the Times report. and Furlong's clairns after being informed of them by the Express-News. "The department is in the process of gathering the facts surrouriding these allegations to determine if there was any inappropriate conduct.? Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said by c-mail. ?If any improprietics are found. the department will take appropriate corrective action.? A LLS. intelligence of?cial. who requested anonymity bccausc of the sensitivity oflhe matter, said in response to Furlong's claims: ?Both DOD and CIA opposed what this individual (Furlong) was trying to do. If this activity was fully authorized by the top military brass. you've got to ask yourself why DOD launched an investigation. It was DOD that shut it down. after all." ?This wasn't a case of turf. It was something that struck both military and intelligence rz-o'. area. retransmit) 2? Orr of?cials as a serious Trading accusations Jeff Addieott. the former senior legal adviser to U.S. Army special forces. said civilian contractors are relied on heavily by the military and can be used in defensive operations. but not in offensive scenarios. ?1 would say if we are using them to gather intelligence. We are not violating the law of war as long as they are not pulling the trigger." said Addicott. director of the Center for Terrorism Law at St. Mary's University. "But if they're involved in the offensive use of violence. that would be a violation." Furlong said the outsourced. unarmed teams he used didn't go around ?kicking in doors? and killing people. He said Pclton?s claims to the Times that Furlong referred to his teams of contractors as "my Jason Bournes? a movie character spy was fantasy concocted by Pelton. Furlong said Peltou was upset his company didn?t get the entire $24.8 million funding that Furlong was able to get through various ?contract vehicles" to fund the program. Pelton called Furlong?s allegations self-serving and unu'utbful. While the contractors included former operatives of the CIA and military special operations forces. Furlong said their role was to collect information that is openly available. such as banter at markets or bazaars that might contain information about potential attacks on US. interests. In the pipeline Furlong said their inlbmiation helped prevent assassinations of two Afghani government of?cials friendly to the U.S. take stuff in open source and throw it in the intelligence pipeline." Furlong said. don't take this infon?nalion and go directly to a kill. It is not the ManningB_?U409?05 \u-r spot and shoot operation that he (Pclton) is making it sound like." Furlong is retired from the Army and said he is a principal strategist. a civilian employee of the Senior Executive Service. for the Nebraska-based U.S. Strategic Command. which runs the Joint Information Operations Warfare Center at Lackland AFB in San Antonio. The center provides global support for U.S. combat commanders. but the matters involving Furlong's controversial acts occurred while Furlong was detailed to U.S. Central Command. which is running theater operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Furlong said the origins of the program date to July 2008. when U.S. forces suffered a blow by an ambush at Wanat, Afghanistan. He said Anny Gen. David McKiernan. then the top U.S. general in Afghanistan. reached out to the military's network and Furlong was called in because of his experience in operations. ?McKiernan was ?t to be tied." Furlong said. ?He said to me. need to know what's going on outside the wire. How can this surprise attack happen to us?? Furlong said he was asked to provide a ?commercial information service that would enhance our situation understanding of the environment" and offered a proposal using former journalists to provide ?ground truth." But Pelton. who also has written books about war zones. offered a different account. He said he and his business partner. Eason Jordan. a former television news executive. had previously set up a pay-for-access Web site about Iraq. iraqsloggcr.com. and had no input from Furlong. Pclton said McKieman provided $1 million from his command's contingency funds for Patton and Jordan to operate another Web site that collected information about Afghanistan and Pakistan from open sources and to produce reports and analyses. Pelton said Furlong was at the meeting with McKiernan, and Furlong said he could fund the proposal. known as AfPax Insider. McKicrnan was ?red last May by the Ubama administration in what some speculated Was an attempt to jump-start a new war strategy that relied more on counterinsurgency tactics and less on conventional warfare. Reached by phone by the Express-News. the now-retired MeKicman declined comment on the matter. The AfPax Insider Web site Was launched after that meeting. but Pelton said initial payments were delayed for unknown reasons until February 2009. and then were provided through St. Pctersburg. Fla-based International Media Ventures. That company didn?t respond to the Express-News? requests for comment. Furlong said he ran into hurdles in getting the program going. in part. because the CIA ?pushed back" and wanted a legal review of his proposal. Such a review was done and the conceptual program was found to be lawful. Furlong said. Furlong also said he obtained $24.8 million in funding for the program under the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization. a Pentagon research organiration meant to help reduce the threats from roadside bombs. But Pelton and Eason. Furlong said. were removed from the project in September after Rear Adm. Gregory Smith. the top military spokesman in Afghanistan and Furlong's boss. decided he didn't Want AtPax's services. And. Furlong said. a review of its services showed it ?over-promised and under-delivered.? The work then was given page 20 to other International Media Ventures' subcontractors who did better. he said. Furlong declined to identify them for security reasons. but the New York Times identi?ed one as Boston-based American International Services Corp. run by a former Green Beret. Pelton. Furlong said. sent him an e-mail stating that. if AfPax didn't get reinstated. he would ?blow this whole operation up." something Pelton denies. Last fall. the New York Times reported. the CIA's station chief in Kabul sent a cable to the Defense Department complaining that Furlong was doing things illegally. It eventually resulted in the military ending the program several months before its May 3] completion. Furlong's version also clashes with the claims of Smith. who told the Times he wasn't aWare of what lntemational Media Ventures employees might be doing in Afghanistan in relation to urlong's program. Smith also told the Times he opposed AfPas's proposals. and that Furlong wanted to spend whatever money was le? over elsewhere. Smith said $l5 million was unaccounted for. and that he had no idea where the money went. Furlong disputed this. saying Smith had a representative at a program review last month in Tampa. ?This event (the Feb. 12 review) re?ected that all the funds and contractor deliverables were accounted for." Furlong said. ?One thing I am not is a crook.? European Stars and Stripes March [8.2010 Pg. I 21. No Gambling In The Wanna Bet? By Mark Patton. Stars and Stripes WIESBADEN. Germany A As millions of Americans scramble to make last-minute adjustments to their NCAA ii'r?. ill eras It?) tournament brackets. the Defense Department is playing the role of bracket buster before the tournament tips off Thursday. ?Office pools on March Madness are not authorired or permitted.? according to DOD spokeswoman Maj. April Cunningham. Joint Ethics Regulations state that DOD employees are prohibited from gambling while on duty. or in federally tinned offices. But of?ces are most March Madness pools take place. A recent survey by the Spherion Corporation estimates 45 percent of workers have participated in an of?ce pool before. and 56 percent ofthose who have participated speci?cally took part in March Madness pools. The tournament might cost U.S. employers as much as $l.8 billion in unproductive wages during the ?rst week of action. according to an annual survey by Chicago-based placement ?rm Challenger. Gray d: Christmas Inc. Sgt. Michael Metabowu with the Armored Division headquarters said he is participating in five different bracket challenges this year. The North Carolina native said basketball brackets were a part of his upbringing and. now that he lives in Germany. it doesn?t interfere with his work because the games occur later in the day. He said he also participates in several of?ce pools. including a recent fantasy football league. where participants pitched in $2 a week. ?Everyone was invited to join. of?cers and enlisted alike," he said. think it builds camaraderie." But the military says violators who misuse government resources or participate in gambling between of?cers and enlisted may be punished under the Uniform Code of Military Justice or face other disciplinary actions. according to Maj. Paul Bodnar. spokesperson for the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade. Unless. that is, the gambling comes in the form of the playing the slot machines at the base bowling alleys or clubs. According to military of?cials. some policy exemptions exist. including the slots that generate revenue for Morale. Welfare and Recreation services. ?While servicemember demand for gambling similar to home may be one reason DOD provides slots. another reason is likely the signi?cant amount of money they generate." said Keith Whyte. executive director of the Washington. DC .-based National Council on Problem Gambling. According to ?gures released in 2003. annual pro?ts from military gambling overseas total about $184 million. The irony is not lost on the soldiers. think it?s hypocritical." said Pfc. Bobby One: with In AD headquarters in Wiesbaden. ?As long as you keep your soldier mentality. you should be allowed to gamble." Plus. ?lling out a bracket is different than playing the slots constantly. said Staff Sgt. Wayne Washington. who was visiting Wicsbadcn on his leave from Fort Hood. Texas. ?Sports. it?s camaraderie. A soldier's gonna bet on what state or university they?re from." Washington said. ?Gambling once a year versus someone who comes to gamble at slots every day is something different: that's an addiction. In the end. while NCAA offico pools are illegal, don't expect the Army to coon-martial anyone soon for ?lling out a bracket. Enforcement of such gambling issues is handled at the unit level. according to Gary Comerford. a spokesman in Washington for the Department of Defense's Of?ce of Inspector General. The DOD does not monitor or track DOD employees participating in March Madness pools unless it is a particularly pool or a scam. . But ?when money?s involved. eyebrows should be raised." said Capt. Emilee Elbert. an administrative law attorney at U.S. Army Europe's Office of the Judge Advocate. ?What probably happens in most situations is we just overlook it and that's a problem." Time.com March 18, 2010 22. To Battle Computer Hackers. The Pentagon Trains Its Own By Mark Thompson. Washington After years of building ?rewalls and other defenses against relentless hacker attacks. the Pentagon is going over to the dark side of computer warfare. Only ethically. of course. The Defense Department. like most large organizations. has recognized that no wall is high enough to keep out skilled and determined hackers for keeps. Instead. it has decided that in order to anticipate and thwart those attacks. it needs to know what the hackers know. "More than 100 foreign intelligence organizations are trying to hack into U.S. systems." Deputy Defense Secretary William warned last month. "Some governments already have the capacity to disrupt elements of the U.S. information infrastructure." So the Pentagon recently modi?ed its regulations to allow military computer experts to be trained in computer hacking. gaining designation as "certi?ed ethical hackers." They'll join more than 20.000 such good-guy hackers around the world who have earned that recognition since 2003 from the private International Council of Consultants (also known as the EC?C?ouncil}. page 2 "We are creating cyber~bodyguards." says Sanjay Basivi. president of the council. "We're not creating combat people." But as the world becomes increasingly interconnected via the lntemct. the stakes have becomc too high to rely on static defenses alone to protect the immense floors of vital information that operate the world's ?nancial. medical. governmental and infrastructure systems. "The bad guys already have the hacking technologies." Bavisi says. "We can say. 'Tough luck. the bad guys play by different rules and you can?t do anything about it. so just go lock your doors.? Or we can tell the good guys. Wt: will arm you with the same knowledge as the bad guys. because to defeat the hacker you need to be able to think like one.? Basivi and the Pentagon are sensitive to the possibility that the tactics taught could be used other purposes. "We're not training Department of Defense guys to become hackers and start hacking into China or any other countries." he says. Week-long courses will train them in l?tl different hacking techniques and technologies. ranging from viruses. worms. sniffer-s and phishing to warfare. The cost of the course ranges from $450 to $2.500 depending on the training involved. Pentagon personnel "are not learning to hack." insists Air Force Lieut. Col. Eric Butterbaugh. While the Eff-Council calls it "certified ethical hacker" training. the U.S. military also calls it "penetration testing" or "red-teaming." These are proven military techniques that have been used for decades to hone war-?ghting skills. The Air Force and Navy. for example. maintain "aggressor squadrons" of ES and warplanes to give U.S. military pilots practice against the tactics of potential foes. And the Army's National Training Center at Fort Irwin. Calif. has long boasted a highly-trained area. txntatta Mi") (J: 11 list)- ManningB_OD409?06 "op-for" opposition force that regular U.S. Army units engage in realistic war games. The program will be no cure-all for the Pentagon, whose networks are backed hundreds of times a day. Adriel Desautels, the chief technology of?cer at Netragard LLC.. a Massachusotls?bascd anti-hacking out?t, says that while "it's better than nothing," there are simply too many vulnerabilities to protect the Pentagon's estimated 10 million computers. Desautels likens it to 1,000 Dutch boys trying to stop water from ?owing through a dike springing millions of leaks. "The threat is de?ned by the real black hats. and it?s impossible to know what the black hats are researching," he says. "The number of vulnerabilities far exceeds what any white hats are going to discover." Both and stisi say there are no coneems that military personnel trained as hackers might go rogue. "Computer network defense service providers," Butterbaugh says, ?are vetted and have security clearances." Not only that, adds Bavisi: those named as ethical hackers have to sign a legally binding pledge that they will not engage in malicious hacking. "So far," he says, "we haven't had a single case where someone became a real hacker.?1 New York Times March IS. 2010 23. 5 Americans Held In Pakistan Plead Not Guilty To Terrorism Charges By Waqar Gillani and Jack Healy LAHORE, Pakistan Five young American Muslims detained in Pakistan in December on suspicion of seeking to join jihadists in Afghanistan were formally charged Wednesday, in a case that added to fears that Westerners might increasingly be turning to lslamist-inspircd terrorism. The ?ve men, friends from the Washington suburbs in their late teens and early 20s, pleaded not guilty to the charges, which include plotting attacks in Afghanistan, raising money to commit terrorism and planning attacks against Pakistani allies and targets within the country, according to Hassan Katehela. a defense lawyer for the men. Some of the charges crry life imprisonment sentences. The ?ve are Romy Zamzam, a dental student of Egyptian descent at Howard University; Ahmed Abdullah Minni, a native of Eritrea; Amati Hassan Yemer, originally from Ethiopia; and Umer Farooq and Waqar Khan, who are of Pakistani background. They are scheduled to appear in court again on March 31, when the government is expected to present evidence. The ?ling of formal charges indicated that the men were not likely to be deported to the United States soon. although the possibility of their expulsion had been raised by American of?cials in the days after their arrest. Pakistani authorities said the men, encouraged by Internet contacts with a Pakistani militant, went to Pakistan last year seeking to wage jihad against American troops in Afghanistan. They were arrested in early December in the city of Sargodha and have been jailed there since. At a closed hearing on Wednesday, a district judge in Sargodha read a three-page description of the ?ve Charges that had been ?led against each man. In addition to plotting attacks in Afghanistan. they were accused of planning assaults on a Pakistani nuclear power plant and Pakistani air force bases in Sargodha and the central city of Miariwali, Mr. Katehela, the defense lawyer. said in a telephone interview. The ease of the ?ve young men is among a handth of high-pro?le terroriSm cases that have recently stimed concerns about the radicalization of Muslims in the United States. This month, a New Jersey man accused of joining Al Qaeda was arrested in a sweep in Yemen, then shot a guard to death at the hospital where he had been taken for treatment, the authorities said. A federal indictment unsealed last week tied a woman who called herself Jihadlane on the Internet to a plot to kill a Swedish artist who had depicted the Prophet Muhammad's head on a dog?s body. David C. Headley of Chicago was accused in December of helping to scout out locations for the deadly attacks on Mumbai, India. in 2008, and has also been charged with planning to attack a Danish newspaper that incensed many Muslims by printing cartoons with the image of the Prophet Muhammad. Mr. Headlcy was expected to plead guilty on Thursday. Najibullah Zazi, an Afghan immigrant who worked at a co?'ec stand in lower Manhattan, pleaded guilty in February to plotting to bomb the New York subway. American authorities called the case one of the most serious threats since the Sept. 11 attacks. Other cases that have drawn concem include those of the several Somali-Americans in Minnesota who returned to Africa to ?ght alongside Islamic militants who control much of Somalia; the Muslim-American accused of shooting [3 people to death at Fort Hood. Tenn, and a Long Island man who converted to Islam and traveled to Pakistan and Afghanistan to join up with militants. Wirqu Gifford reported from Lahore, and Jack Heal}! from New York. page 22 Reuterscom March 17, 2010 24. Americans Have Direct Access To Taliban No. 2 By Adam Entous. Reuters WASHINGTON U.S. investigators have recently been given more regular direct access to Pakistani-led interrogations of the Afghan Taliban?s No. 2 leader, US. of?cials said on one month alter his arrest was announced. Pakistani limitations on US. access to Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar have been a source of tension since he was captured in the port city of Karachi. The joint operation that nabbed the Taliban's top military commander has been so shrouded in secrecy that US. and Pakistani of?cials could not even say with certainty what day it took place. It was unclear whether the direct U.S. access, disclosed by of?cials who requested anonymity, was yielding useful intelligence. But the commander of U5. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, General Stanley McClu'ystal, held out Baredar's arrest as a potential game-changer. telling reporters separately that it "seems to have shaken the con?dence of some of the Afghan Taliban leadership." did not discuss the interrogation issue. Previously undisclosed details about the joint U.S.-Pakistani raid. believed to how taken place in late January. shed new light on what has been described in Washington as a major intelligence and propaganda coup that could open divisions within Taliban ranks and weaken a deadly insurgency after eight years of war. But many questions remain unanswered, such as whether Pakistan's powerful intelligence service was ?tment LII ManningB_00409T07 turning against its long-time Taliban allies. or took action against Baradar to ensure its interests would be represented in any future reconciliation process. "We see indications that they are trying to ?gure out what way ahead that they should plot." told reporters in a conference call from Afghanistan. referring to the tentative response of Taliban leaders to Baradar's arrest. Mark Sedwill. a British diplomat serving as the senior NATO civilian of?cial in Afghanistan, said; "In a sense I think they (Afghan Taliban leaders) are recalibrating because they don't yet know where they stand. That's a good thing -- we want them to be uncertain about their future." "This is going to be a real poker game with these guys over the next few months." Scdwill added. referring to the possibility that some Taliban leaders might opt to reach out for a deal. Pakistan has balked at handing over Baradar either to the United States or to Afghanistan for interrogation. and some U.S. of?cials have complained privately about a lack of direct access to the secret interrogation sessions. U5. FBI director Robert Mueller was in Islamabad late last month to discuss the issue and to press for more access for US. investigators. "There is direct access to him." a US. of?cial said on condition ol'anonymity. He described the level of direct access of late as "de?n iter more than minimal." "More information is coming out of these discussions." the of?cial added. though he declined to say whether any of the information was useful to the U.S. government or military. Initially. U.S. of?cials characterized the intelligence value as minimal. But a mi litury of?cial said on Wednesday that a "good" amount of information was ?owing to commanders and "the hope is this is a precursor of things to come. New information from U.S. officials about the Karachi operation cast doubt on what some observers termed the "dumb luck theory" of how Baradar was captured that he was swept up in a raid targeting others. "This wasn't a case of simple happenstanee." said a US. counterterrorism of?cial familiar with the operation. "There was intelligence that came together and made this a Baradar-related operation. There were strong indications in advance that the capture would involve, if not him. at least some of his associates." the of?cial added. The arrest was not disclosed because "it took a while to identify Baradar" conclusiirely. the counterterrorisrn of?cial said. US. of?cials and are still debating Pakistan's motives, The arrest followed Afghan President Hamid Karzai's announcement of a high pro?le effort aimed at reconciling with Taliban leaders. There have been con?icting reports that Baradar. the former top Taliban military commander. might haste been talking to Kabul. and that may have led to his arrest. Additional Sue Fleming. reporting by Washington Post March 18. 2010 25. Discloses US. Base Plan By News services Of?cials in the impoverished Central Asian nation of said the United States plans to build a $5 million military base for training local troops. already hosts a US. base in Mamas. outside the capital. Bishkek. which is used as a regional hub for the ESL-led war in nearby Afghanistan. The Kyrgin govemment last year backed off a threat to evict U.S. forces from Manas alter Washington offered to triple its rent. From new services Defeanewscom March 17. 2010 26. 0.5. Says Okinawa Base Needed To Defend Japan By Shaun Tendon, Agence France?Presse WASHINGTON -- The United States said March 17 that it needs to maintain a base on the Japanese island of Okinawa to defend the region. as the new govemment in Tokyo considers scrapping a previous plan. Senior US. of?cials told Congress that while they respected the decisions of Prime Minister Tukio Hntoyarna's six-month-old government. they hoped to go ahead with a plan to move the Futenma air base within Okinawa. Michael Scltitfer. a senior Pentagon official. told a congressional panel that troops in Okinawa were the only ground forces "between Hawaii and India" which the United States could quickly deploy. "Futenma may be but one base and one part of a larger alliance relationship. but peace and stability in the region depend in no small part on the enduring presence of forward deployed U.S. forces in Japan." said Schiffer. the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Asia. "The United States cannot meet its treaty obligations to defend Japan. cannot respond to humanitarian crises or natural disasters. cannot meet its commiUHents for regional peace and stability without forward deployed ground forces in Japan.? he said. He said the Futenrna move was a "lynehpin" of 2006 deal under which more than 8.000 US. troops would leave Okinatva for the US. territory 00158 page 23- of Guam. Under the agreement. Futenrna would move from the crowded urban hub of Ginowan to a quiet village. Schiffer and Joseph Donovan. his counterpart at the State Department. both testi?ed that the deal was the best solution to limit the impact on Okinawa while maintaining troops in the region. But some of Hatoyama?s left-leaning allies want the base moved entirely out of Japan. blaming the noops for noise and crime. Despite President Barack Obama's support for the 2006 deal. several lawmakers from his Democratic Party have voiced sympathy for Okinawans' grievances. Rep. Eni Faleomavaegm a Democrat who heads the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Asia. pointed out that Okinawa accounts for one percent of Japan's land but two-thirds of bases deployed there. "The Okinawans feel like they're always being the whipping boy for the last 50 years. We just put our military people there and don't have to worry about it." Falcomavaega said. But Republican Rep. Ed Royce of California said that the Hatoyama government had "badly handled" the Futenma issue. "The alliance has been a force for stability in a very tough neighborhood but there is cause for concern." Royce said. "Japan?s government is inexperienced. Some Japanese leaders would like to see Tokyo tilt more towards Beijing." he said. Hatoyama has called for a more equal relationship between Tokyo and Washington and suggested creating an East Asian regional network without the United States. which stations 41000 troops in Japan under a security treaty. lehiro Dzawa. the Hit. arcs. EXHIBIT nee) Manninga_eo4osroa backroom powerbroker of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan. in December took hundreds of lawmakers to visit Beijing. sending the United States scrambling to invite more Japanese MP3 to Washington. But most U.S. are doubtful about a wider shift toward Beijing. noting that Japan has deep-rooted historical tensions with China and longstanding concerns about the giant neighbor's soaring military budget. US. expectations of Japan may be colored by the 2001-2006 premiership of Juniehiro Koizumi who broke taboos by sending troops to Iraq and defying China. said Michael Auslin. a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute think tank. "Ii'anything. current trends in Japanese policymaking. including Japan's recent outreach to China. re?ect a retunt to a more traditional Japanese position that attempts to maintain some level of balance in Japanese foreign policy." Auslin said. Reuterscom March 17. 2010 27. North Korea Has 1,000 Missiles, South Says By Jack Kim. Reuters SEOUL -- North Korea has increased its missile arsenal by 25 percent in the past two years to about 1.000. expanding the threat the state poses to the region. the Smiths defense chief said Wednesday. Pyongyang's arsenal includes intenncdiate-range missiles that can hit targets at up to 3.000 km miles} away. Yonhap news agency quoted Kim Tao-young as telling a forum of business leaders. The missiles could hit all of Japan and put U.S. military bases in Guam at risk. South Korea?s last estimate of the North's missile stockpile was $00 done in 2008. Yonhap said. Its Defense White Paper in 2008 said the North had deployed the intermediate range missile. The estimate comes at a time when the North is seen to be under increasing pressure to return to six-party talks on nuclear disarmament, following economic sanctions imposed on it after its nuclear test in May 2009. North Korean leader Kim Jong-il has been trying to hold the destitute state together as its economic troubles mount. the South Korean defense ol?eial said. "Kim long-ll is struggling to stabilize his regime and hold its system together and has been focusing on securing resources from the outside while maintaining a planned economy." he said. A botched attempt to reform the currency triggered anger among an already importerished public because it stoked in?ation. News reports said Kim may visit China late this month for the first time in four years to shore up investment from his biggest benefactor in new projects his country has launched to increase its meager international trade and commerce. Korea Herald March IS. 2010 28. 'Kim Jung-i] Has Three Years Left' By Kim So-hyun North Korean leader Kim Jung-ii. whose questionable health has received international attention. appears to have three years left to live. a senior US. of?cial was quoted as saying. Kurt Campbell. U.S. assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Paci?c affairs, voiced his observations on sonsitive issues such as Kim's life expectancy and Pyongyangs preparations for power succession during a closed-door meeting with South Korean lawnmkers and defectors from the North at the US, embassy in Seoul on Feb. 3. multiple participants said. "Medical analyses suggest that Kim has another three years left to live." Campbell was quoted as saying during the meeting. South Korean observers suspect the 68-year-old Kim may have a kidney disease. judging from his usually white ?ngernails in recent photographs and from bits of intelligence. Kim reportedly suffered a stroke in the summer of 2003 and disappeared from the public for months. Campbell also noted that the power transfer process from Kim Jong-il to his third son long-eon was entirely different from that of the Kim lI-sung-Kim long-i] succession. to a participant. The US. of?cial said that Chang Song-thaek. Kim Jong~il's brother-in-law and chief of administration at the North Korean Workers' Party. will serve as the guardian once Jong-eun takes over. Campbell also mentioned the possibility of cracks in the relationship between the junion Kim and his uncle. participants said. Campbell was on a three-day visit to Seoul for discussions with South Korean of?cials on North Korea and the Washington-Seoul alliance. according New York Times March 13. 2010 29. Clinton To Meet With Russian Leaders On Arms Control Talks By Mark Landler SHANNON. Ireland With the United States and Russia still haggling over the fine print of a long-delayed arms control pact. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton left Washington on Wednesday for high?level meetings in Moscow. as the Obama administration tried to push the talks across the ?nish line. Mrs. Clinton planned to meet President Dmitri A. 00159 page 2-1 Medvedev of Rossia and the foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov. who expressed con?dence last week that a deal could be reached by the end of the month. That would allow President Dbama to present. the agreement. which would make deep cuts in the nuclear arsenals of both countries. at an international summit on nuclear non-proliferation next month in Washington. ?Certainly this is a moment when we've made a lot of progress and we certainly hope to make more. and the secretary?s involvement is extremely important." the undersecretary of state for political affairs. William J. Burns. said to reporters traveling on Mrs. CI inton' 5 plane. ?We want to move ahead to ?nish the agreement.? he said. In Moscow. Mrs. Clinton will also meet with leaders from the Eumpean Union and the United Nations. as well as Russia. to discuss the fallout from a sharp con?ict between the United States and Israel over the Israeli govemment's announcement of a housing plan for Jews in East Jerusalem last week. Although an anus deal could theoretically be announced while Mrs. Clinton is in Moscow. the months of tortuous negotiations have made administration of?cials extremely leery of predicting the end of a process they had once claimed Would be wrapped up by the end of last year. In recent weeks. Mr. Obama has thrust himself into the negotiations. speaking twice by phone with Mr. in the last three weeks. In the ?rst call. Mr. Obama was surprised to hear the Russian president raise several fresh hurdles. including the revised American plan for a missile-defense system. which Mr. Obama believed had been settled by negotiators in Geneva. IHV. UFCR. EXHIBIT a MW) 93 aegis/.5. ManningE_00409?09 ?Every time you think you ?re done, new issues pop up in Geneva1 and what seemed like trivia become major political issues,? said another senior administration official. speaking on the condition on anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly. Now, both sides said the talks were back on track, though administration of?cials concede there were still differences over a hand?rl of issues like transparency and the missile defense system. Russia reacted badly to an announcement in January that Romania would host part of the system, and reintroduced a demand that the treaty contain language limiting the system. Mr. lDbamta held a second. more upbeat, call with Mr. Mcdvedcv last Saturday, and the White House hopes that Mrs. Clinton's meeting with the Russian president at his dacha will build on that momentum. ?Otherwise. it does not get done," the of?cial said. ?Otherwise. it drags on like the last Start Treaty, which I think took nine years." The agreement, which would replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty of 1991, or Start. would be a symbol of the new relationship Mr. Dbama is trying to forge with Russia. It would reduce deployed strategic warheads and delivery systems by at least 25 percent. Citing another sign of better ties between the countries, of?cials said that 30 percent of supplies for American troops in Afghanistan were now being shipped through Russian territory, either by airplane or train. Mrs. Clinton is also expected to seek a public show of support from Russia for tougher United Nations sanctions against Iran. which could help the administration press its case with a resistant China. Russia has been more open to a harder line toward Tehran ManningB_0040971D since the [ranian government rebuffed a proposal to ship much of its uranium to Russia and France to be enriched to a higher level to fuel a research reactor in Tehran that produces medical isotopes, But China has so far insisted on using diplomacy rather than additional sanctions, which has left the United States scrambling to line up international support for a resolution in the Security Council. Mr. Burns, the undersecretary of state, said he was con?dent a resolution would he adopted. though he did not offer a timetable. ?There?s a sense of urgency that we feel, and We'd like to move this ahead as quickly as we can," he said. New York Times March 13.2010 30. Ukraine: Venue Offered For Arms Talks By Andrew E. Kramer Ukraine's new president, Viktor F. Yanultovich, has offered Kiev as a location for the United States and Russia to sign a revamped noclcar arms reduction treaty, once it has been agreed to. Though the peace agreement is unrelated to Ukraine. having the treaty formally signed in Kiev. the capital. would be rich in symbolism for a country whose recent internal politics became a tug of war between Russia and the West for economic and political in?uence. Mr. Yanukovich, though he is generally viewed as leaning heavily toward Russia, has promoted the idea of Ukraine as bridge between East and West. rather than a country that falls readily within either sphere of influence. Russian of?cials welcomed the offer; the United States would prefer Prague. where Presith Obama gave a speech on disarmament last year, Ukraine's new foreign minister, Kostyantyn said Wednesday. Reuterscom March li?. ROI [1 31. Obama Says US. To Pursue Aggressive Iran Sanctions By Jeff Mason and Deborah Charles. Reuters WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama said on Wednesday the United States would pursue ?aggressive sanctions" to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon that could potentially spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Obama, who had made the goal of pursuing dialogue with [ran a cornerstone of his administration's foreign policy at the beginning of his presidency, said he had been successful in getting the international community to isolate Tehran. "As we've seen, the Iranian government has been more concerned about preventing their people from exercising their democratic and human rights than trying to solve this problem diplomatically." Obama said in an interview on Fox News Channel's Special Report with Bret Baier. "That?s why we're going to go after aggressive sanctions. We haven?t taken any options off the table. We are going to keep on pushing," Obama said. Iran denies it is seeking to build a nuclear bomb and says its nuclear program is aimed at generating clecuicity. Obama said preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon was one of his administration's highest priorities. "It is a hard problem but is a problem that we need to solve because if Iran gets a nuclear weapon then you could potentially sea a nuclear arms race throughout the Middle East and that would be tremendously damaging to our national security interests," he said. US. of?cials said on Tuesday the pace of lran's lio'r. i:l i: page 25 nuolear weapons development appears to have slowed. buying time for a new round of sanctions now and potentially more sweeping measures later. Reuters.com March 17. 2010 32. Clinton, Gates To Mexico To Talk About Drug Fight By Deborah Charles. Reuters WASHINGTON US. Secretary of State. Hillary Clinton will lead a top-level delegation to Mexico on March 23 to discuss efforts to fight drug cartels, [0 days after three people linked to a US consulate were killed in a border city. State Department spokesman PJ. Crowley said Clinton would be accompanied by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair as well as other senior national security officials. They will be meeting to discuss the US. Merida Initiative. a 200? plan to give Mexico $1.4 billion to help ?ght the country's powerful drug cartels. Crowley said the meeting had been in preparation Ibr several months. Two Americans and one Mexican linked to the US. consulate in Ciudad Juarez, just over the border from El Paso, Texas. were killed on Saturday. The killings were part of a surge in drug-related violence along the border. CNN March 17, 2010 33. Cops Out Lesbian Staff Sgt. American (CNN). 8:00 AM KJRAN CHETRY: For nine years, she kept a secret. Jenc Newsorne didn't tell anyone in the Air Force she was a lesbian. Then just as momentum was building to Morning repeal the military's "Don't Ask. Don?t Tell" policy. Jene was outed by a third party. lt was actually her local police department in South Dakota alter they saw an Iowa marriage certi?cate in her home. JOHN ROBERTS: She's now discharged from the Air Force. Jene and the American lCivil Liberties Union have ?led a complaint against the Rapid City Police Department. saying that the of?cers violated her privacy. The police department. meanwhile, maintains they were simply following routine procedures. Jene joins thus morning via Sirpr from Fairbanks. Alaska. Good to see you this morning. Just to set the stage here. you got married. as Kiran . said. in Iowa last October to your partner. Cheryl Hudson. You were sticking by the "Don?t Ask. Don't Tell" policy until this incident with the Rapid City Police Department. ?What happened. and how did your sexual orientation get reported up to the military? JENE NEWSOME: Well. they just came to my home back in November. and like they said. they said they seen the marriage certificate and pretty much reported it to the military. But I think they were upset that I didn?t cooperate as well as they wanted me to during the situation. ROBERTS: Now. just in terms. by way of further explanation of why the police department was at your home, they were there to serve a felony arrest Warrant on your ptu'tner'? NEWSDME: Correct. CHETRY: And how did they see your marriage certi?cate? NEWSOME: They said they seen it on the kitchen table through the window. supposedly. It doesn't make much sense to me. but that's what they said. CHETRY: So. what do for something. or they might have seen it a little bit and could tell it was some type of document ?'om louvre. But i think that they looked into it further. ROBERTS: So the real point in all ofthis. Jene. is why the police department reported your marital status up to the military. We know that one of the officers who was there at your home is a member of the Army National Guard. Was there any reason in your mind for the police department to report the existence of this marriage certi?cate to the military? NEWSOME: I don't think there was much of a reason. They wanted me to come home from work so I could open up my home to them. and was unable to leave work. And I think the of?cer was upset over the situation and that's why he reported it. He explained to me that he knew how the military worked and he explained to me that he Was in the Army National Guard and he would just let the military handle it. ROBERTS: In your knowledge. is it common for the police to report to the military if the spouse of a member of the armed services is involved in some sort of criminal complaint? NEWSOME: No. No. it's not. CHETRY: Well, here's what they're saying. the Rapid City police of?cers. They gave us this statement. and I'd like to get your reaction. They said the arrest report was later forwarded by a detective to the United States Air Force consistent with long-standing practices of open communication when military personnel have contact with local law enforcement. They go on to say they regret that the information led to your discharge and they say it's best addressed by the Air Force. They say they were NEWSOME: don't believe that because usually if the military member is in some kind of trouble with the law and committed a crime of some sort. And that wasn't the case with me. ROBERTS: And in your knowledge. again. that doesn't extend to the spouse or a family member of a member of the military services? NEWSOME: No. it doesn't. ROBERTS: 0K. The police department is make nothing apology. as we said. saying that the oflieers acted properly according to depanment procedure. But last month the secretary of defense. Robert Gates. said that the military would. quote, "raise the bar of credible information needed to institute an inquiry in "Don't Ask. Don't Tell,? and might even stop dismissing Hoops based on third-party accusations. which is what happened here. You were discharged hack in January. I'm wondering if, based on what Secretary Gates said. you might make a case for reinstatement. Do you think it's maybe too late. or Would you even want to do that? NEWSOME: Well. if they decided to drop "Don't Ask. Don?t Tell" altogether. it's a great consideration. How frustrating is it for you knowing that "Don?t Ask, Don't Tell" was pending. the repeal of it. knowing that it's something that has been called for now by many. and knowing that you've been discharged because a third party outed you? NEWSOME: It's very ?nstratjng. I was looking forward to the change. I believed in the change. And it was a great disappointment when I found out that was being discharged. especially under the circumstances. ROBERTS: Jene Newsomc. thanks for joining page 26 ROBERTS: Thanks again. Washington Times March 18. 2010 Pg. it 34. Inside The Ring By Bill Gert: Cyberwarfare coming The Pentagon?s massive worldwide computer networks were hit with a major malicious so?ware attack in 2008 through a computer flash drive inserted into a computer. The electronic strike was a watershed event that triggered cybersecurity improvements and a temporary ban on the use of portable storage devices. the commander of the US. Strategic Command said Tuesday. Air Force Gen. Kevin Chilton. commander of the Strategic Command. told a House hearing that such penetrations are an example of the types of threats facing the military as it gears up for computer warfare and the creation of a new cyberwarfarc command. "We can anticipate that adversarial actors will make cyberspace a battle ??ont in future warfare." Gen. Chilton said. ?Even today. intrusions and espionage into our networks. as well as eybe r-inci dents abroad. highlight the unprecedented and diverse challenges we face in the battle for information." Gen. Chilton described the penetration as a "serious intrusion" he called a "seminal event" for the military and Pentagon. Defense officials said at the time that the sophisticated electronic computer break-in likely was canied out by the Chinese government or military, although attributing it directly to Beijing was dif?cult. Lt. Cmdr. Steve Curry. a Strategic Command of?cial. said later that the 2008 attack involved "particular variants of you think really happened? followmg long-standing us this morning to tell your computer wont?ts" that NEWSOME: I think that practices. You say you don't story. We do appreciate it. ?infected computers they were just looking. looking necessarily believe that. Why? NEWSOME: No problem. and targeted Mlcr?so? Pg F5 .. Windows operating systems." He declined to provide further details. citing security considerations. Gen. Chilton said that as a result of hacking. "our forces developed new network monitoring and evaluation systems and grappled with the security needs of sprawling networks where low cost and ef?ciency have often taken priority over security." Strategic Command is moving ahead with plans announced in October to set up a new US. Cybezr Command near the National Security Agency at Fort Meade. Md. In a ?rst step. two units already are being consolidated. The Joint Task Force-Global Network Operations, which conduets cyberdefcnse. is being put together with the Joint Functional Component Command for Network Warfare. the offensive cyhenvarfare component. he said. "We've already started to unify those two mission areas." Gen. Chilton said. The new subcommand has been delayed by the Senate. which has yet to hold hearings on the nomination of its commander. current NSA Director Army Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander. Conventional vs. nuke James N. Miller. deputy undersecretary of defense for policy. told Congress this week that the Pentagon is working on conventionally armed loug?range missiles and other non?nuclear strike weapons as part of its efforts to limit nuclear weapons. Mr. Miller said the effort grew out of the recent four-year strategy review. Pentagon officials are "now studying the appropriate long-term mix of non-nuclear long-range strike capabilities. including penetrating and standoff bombers. cruise missiles. and conventionally armed ballistic missiles." Mr. Miller told the House Anned Services strategic forces subcommittee. The use of conventionally tipped. long-range missiles was opposed in the past by some in Congress who feared their use would trigger a nuclear war if states such as Rossia and China misinterpreted any launch of a non?nuclear as a nuclear attack and they ?red their nuclear missiles in retaliation as part of what is called launch-on-warning. Air Force Gen. Kevin Chilton. commander of the US. Strategic Command. who appeared with Mr. Miller before the House Anned Services strategic forces subcommittee on Tuesday. said he does not support a one-for-one replacement of nuclear warheads with precision-guided conventional bombs or missiles- Conventional-missile strikes can be a deterrent to an invasion of South Korea by North Korea. but "we have to be careful when we start talking about one-for-onc substitutions of conventional weapons for nuclr Weapons." he said. "whm deterrence it comes to the mission. not the war?ghting mission necessarily. the nuclear weapon has a deterrent factor that far exceeds a conventional threat." he said. Rapid global strikes with non-nuclear missiles would be "an additional weapon in the quiver of the president" during a crisis when only nuclear missiles are a timely option. he said. "But the connective tissue between that and the one-for-one exchange for a nuclear deterrent. I'm not quite there." he said. The effort is expected to be outlined in detail in the Nuclear Posture Review the Pentagon is expected to make public next moulh. Mr. Miller said the new Strategic An'ns Reduction Treaty being negotiated with Moscow is expected to be completed in the next few weeks. It is aimed at cutting nuclear weapons to between 1.5130 and 1.635 warheads and between 500 and 1.100 missiles and bombers. Anti-military fatwa Pentagon spokesmen declined to comment on the fatwa, or religious edict. issued sevEral years ago by the Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America (AMIA) that prohibits Muslims from providing food to US. and allied troops working in Muslim countries. such as Iraq and Afghanistan. The fatwa by Main Khalid al-Qudah is dated June 20, BUM. and was issued in response to the question of whether a Muslim who owns a shipping company is allowed under Islamic law to transport food from a storage facility to a harbor. "knowing that these supplies will be sent to soldiers Working in Islamic countries under the auspices of the allied forces." "That would not be permissible. for that would be helping others in sin and transgression." the fatwa stated. According to terrorism the fanva highlights the shortcomings of the Pentagon?s aggressive "outreach" program to American Muslim groups over the past several years. According to critics. the program sought to win over the groups. but often included Muslims organizations with ties to the radical Muslim Brotherhood. the Egyptian group that has provided the ideological underpinnings for al Qaeda. Patrick Poole. a counter-terrorism specialist. said the fatvva indicates the Pentagon's efforts to mitigate the threat from American Muslims through public outreach is not working. "For years. the Pentagon has invested heavily in various Muslim-outreach programs. only to ?nd time and again that they were one-way. dead-end streets." he said. Mr. Poole said the outreach effons are misguided because the Pentagon has beau page 2? ?reaching out to the wrong Muslim leaders." "The best example is the Pentagon's reliance on Abdurahman Alamoudi to establish their MUsl im ehaplaincy program in the [9905. and who at the time was al Qaeda?s top American fundraiser and the most prominent Islamic ?gure in the country." he said. Alamoudi. founder of the American Muslim Council. is currently serving a 23?year prison term on terrorism-related charges. "In that the Pentagon ignored many calls of concern about Alamoudi's outspoken extremism." Mr. Poole said. "And now that we see with these anti-military fatwas issued by top American Islamic leaders that nearly two decades of outreach efforts to the Muslim community are utter failures. the Pentagon doesn't want to address the fact that they are not working." Paul Sperry. a journalist who specializes in Islamist extremism. said the AMJA is known to be close to Muslim Brotherhood leaders who often pose as moderate American Muslim scholars. "Many of them Islam at the Brotherhood-condoned American Open University." he said. "That's why their rulings are so strict in their compliance to medieval Shariah code. including advocating adherence to barbaric 'hudood' punishments for crimes against Islam." Hudood is the Islamic practice of beheading apostates. cutting off the limbs of thieves or stoning women for in?delity. A spokesman for the AMJA could not be reached for cemment. A second American Muslim. the Yemen-based al Qacda. leader Anwar al?Awlaki teach Mosl im also has issued a fatwa declaring the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to be crimes against Muslims. He warned other American Muslims not to serve in the arcs. EXHIBII i} no?) Pg {1535 Hill. ManningB_OO409712 LLS. military or support U.S. military efforts. He also has issued a fatwa that said U.S. troops and bases should be attacked. London Times March 18. 20th 35. Somali Pirates Captured After Attack On Dutch Warship By Foreign Staff, Nairobi Dutch Marines fought off an ill-advised attempt by pirates to hijack the warship Tromp off the coast of Somalia yesterday. Troops ?red warning shots when the pirates raced towards them in small skiffs prompting a swift about-turn and an unsuccessful attempt to flee when the pirates realised their mistake. The skiffs were later sunk and the pirates' weapons con?scated. "It shows a lack of sophistication but it is a wanting that they will attack any vessel." Commander John Harbour, an EU Naval Force spokesman, said. The EU Naval Force has dismpted ll pirate attack groups off the coast of East Africa over the past two weeks as part of a more o??cnsivc mindset to stop pirate attacks, he said. say piracy will continue to be a problem until an effective government is established on Somalia's lawless shores. It has not had a functioning government since a socialist dictatorship dissolved into civil war years ago. The current administration is too busy ?ghting an Islamic insurgency to tackle the well-anncd and well-funded pirate bases along its Minn-mile long coastline. The London-based International Maritime Bureau says Somali pirates captured 47 vessels last year and launched 21? attacks. More than 100 crew are still being held. NBC March 17. 201i] ManningB_00409?13 36. Making A Difference NBC News. PM BRIAN WILLIAMS: We?re back with our ?Making A Difference" report tonight. It?s about a military tradition in this country dating back to the time of the cavalry, using a horse-drawn hearse -- a caisson -- at military funerals. With 1.800 American veterans dying each day on average. it?s a rare honor these days. But one woman is personally making sure some people do get to continue this tradition. Her story tonight from NBC's Roger O'Neil. ROGER it is a solemn and lonely lane they travel. The silence broken by the steady cadence of the horse. whose ancestors once carried warriors into battle. But on this day, Lorraine Melgosa and her Percheron carry a warrior to a more pcace?il place. with poignant words from a poem. LORRAINE MELGOSA [Ownen Homanrawn Hearse]; ?My task is no burden for the honor is great. With courage and pride, he died for his country.? For five years, the plain spoken farmer from Colorado has traveled thousands of miles over four states. This is her duty. she says. to soldiers she did not know. MELGOSA: These brave men and women that voluntarily raise their hands and said I'm going to protect this nation, then I need to raise my hand and help honor those that did that. This is the 39th flag-draped east-tin the carriage driver and her horse have taken to their ?nal resting place. She expects nothing in return. Charlene Westbrook says Lorraine's big horse and big heart made burying her soldier husband Kenneth a little easier. HARLENE WESTBROOK [Wife of Deceased Soldier]: For her to sacri?ce. you know. her time. ?1 her money and for her to do this for our family. there were no words. MELGOSA: ?For with dignity and grace, I?ll carry him home. With each strike of my massive hooves, his soul will soar in the heavens above." The poem ends: ?Down the lane slowly, I'll go." As one said, with a horse, a hearse, and a sense of duty, a woman pays tribute to fallen heroes. Roger O'Neil, NBC News, Colorado Springs. Colorado. New York Times March 18, 2010 37. He Asked. They Told. By Laurie Wincr Los Angeles -- AFTER he posted the ?rst seven pictures on his Web Site, .lcff could not sleep. kept getting up and checking my c-mail," he said. ?l was expecting to hear from someone in the military. What if they demanded information ?'om me? Some of the people photographed have been serving for 20 years. They could lose their pensions." Mr. a photographer, had ?nished the ?rst phase of ?Don?t Ask. Don't Tell." a series of poi-nails of gay men and lesbians serving in the military, all ofthem in uniform and with their faces obscured in some way by a hand. a door ?ame or by darkness. Some subjects turn their backs to the camera. In one image an airman who takes the pseudonym Jess sits on a hotel bed leaning inward. One elbow rests on his knee. his hand cupping his face to shield it from the camera. The portrait is pervaded by a sense of loneliness and isolation. ?Don't Ask, Don?t Tell,? a self-published book {dadtbook.com; $24.95}, had grown out of Mr. Sheng?s earlier project, ?Fearless,? which featured large. glossy portraits of young athletes who are openly gay, bisexual or page 28 transgender. Since 2006, "Fearless" has toured more than 40 colleges and high schools in the United States and last month was shown at Pride House, a space created at the Olympic Games in Vancouver, British Columbia. for gay athletes to relax with family and friends. ?Fearless,? in turn, had grown out of the experience the photographer had playing tennis in high school. Mr. is a handsome. slim, 29-year-old who favors jeans and fresh button-down cotton shirts and somehow always looks as if he just got out of the shower. The son of Taiwanese immigrants. he was raised in Thousand Oaks. a suburb of Los Angeles. He was bright and coordinated student class presidenL president of the California Association of Student Councils and a good tennis player. But he found he could never fully relax in the World of competitive sports. ?There?s a lot of homophobia." he said. was not comfortable being out" At Harvard, Mr. Sheug left tennis behind and discovered a new preoccupation: he picked up a camera and found he loved the solitary hours spent in the darkroom. ?It was a refuge for me," he said during a recent interview in his roomy studio, nestled behind a flooring factory on an industrial stretch just east of Culver City. Mr. Sheng was a freshman in 1993 when Matthew Shepard was killed in Wyoming. Shaken, he wanted to go to a campus memorial service, but he did not for fear of breaking down in public. His idea for ?Fearless? was to "photograph people I looked up to. people who had done something signi?cant that had been impossible for me to do,? he said. That series now includes Ill] athletes from the United States and Canada, almost all stare frankly into the camera. Mr. explained For? . Pg 3ft) 1 oi- 325 IT MILD) his choice: ?Sometimes when you get stared at. your only choice is to stare back." In early 2003. when ?Fearless? began getting attention in the press. Mr. Sheng received his ?rst c-mail message from a service member saying he had been moved by the photos. More e-mail messages came. about It} in all. before the photographer realized he had found his next project. He began traveling the country to interview and shoot military personnel. either in their bedrooms or in hotel rooms near their bases. Al tirst he paid his travel expenses himself: later. he was helped by a grant from the Paul and Daisy Soros Foundation. (Mr. also teaches full time at the University of (?alifomia. Santa Barbara.) Where the ?Fearless? photos were bright and glossy (they were shot on film). the new works are muted and shadow-?lled. For ?Don?t Ask. Don't Tell." Mr. Sheng used a digital camera. which allowed him to show his subjects their pictures right away and so. he said. helped to build trust. Mr. has photographed 40 servicemen and servicewomen so far and plans to shoot 20 more. His ?Don't Ask. Don?t Tell" Show. featuring around 30 photos. will open at the Kaycee Ulsen Gallery in Culver City in September. Mr. Sheng is at work on a second volume of the book. He described his subjecui. identi?ed only by ?rst names that are pseudonyms. as people who ?didn?t want to risk their careers. but who wanted to take some kind of stand.? Earnest and passionate about his work. Mr. Sheng said he struggles to avoid being heavy-handed as an artist. ?1 merge a light for social equality with photography. but I'm always trying to ?gure out how to do it intelligently." he said. Mr. Sheng recalled his ?rst interview with Matt. one of his military subjects. ManningB_00409T14 asked him if he had seen anyone die.? Mr. Sheng said. his face ?lling with color. knew he was a medic who served two tours in Iraq.? In his last tour, Matt told Mr. Sheng, his truck was hit by an improvised explosive device. Matt was injured and his two closest Friends were killed. Reached by phone in Texas. Matt. 24. said he has decided not to re-enlist. He said he was disturbed by the situation: of a friend who Was discharged after being spotted dancing with another man in a ?Once you are deployed.? he said. ?you live with people in an intimate way. You trust them with your life and they become brothers and sisters. I couldn?t help thinking that it' something happened to me, no one would know who I was. That is not the way I Want to leave this world.? Matt said he was ?blow away? when he saw his photo in Mr. Sheng's book. became very emotional." he said. In the book. Mr. reproduces one of Maith e?mail messages in which he writes. ?After all I had been through in one instant I could go from War Hero to The gay soldier that was discharged. How could this be right?? The airman known as less is perhaps the project?s most visible ?gure. It was his image that landed on the book cover and in Time magazine in Febmary. love the photo." he said over the phone a few days ago. ?It?s great but it?s also revealing. If you knew me. you would know it's me in that photo. I didn't realize that my photo was going to be that out there. I did worry that something might happen. but nothing did. I?m proud I did it. I think it shows to conservative Americans that gay military is just normal." After serving in Afghanistan. Jess was moved from what he called a ?more liberal? unit to one where he was ?pushed back in the closet" He ?nds his situation dif?cult ?You can?t get to know people," he said. ?You can't develop bonds with the people you?re ?ghting with day in and day out. I can?t talk about myself. I?m afraid I?ll reveal something. I?m constantly on guard." Mr. Sheng recently met and photographed an ROTC cadet who was planning on becoming a doctor. After three years of training. she was ready to deploy. When she read her honor oath. which states that ?a cadet will not lie. cheat or steal. nor tolerate those who do." the young woman decided she must tell her commanding of?cer the truth about herself. That commander immediately pressed for her discharge. "Now." said Mr. Sheng. ?she may have to ?nd a way to pay back the $80,000 spent on her education." For ?Fearless,? Mr. Sheng had considered making a ?lm but eventually ?gured he had made the right choice for the project. ?People are not going to see a 90-minute documentary about gay athletes or about DADT unless they already agree with its premise." he said. ?But people can happen upon a picture. Some piettn'es like the ones of civil rights protesters being attacked by dogs sum up what?s really at stake. People who don?t even mean to see it end up seeing it. And then things change." The policy known as ?don?t ask. don?t tell" the DADT he refers to has been in place since 1993. Last month Adm. Michael Mullen. the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for an end to it. saying. cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens." And this week. Gen. David Petraens. head of the Central Command. testi?ed before the Senate Armed Services 00164 page 29 Committee. saying he believed that "the time has come to consider a change to Don't Ask. Don?t Tell." adding. "but I think it should be done in a thoughtful and deliberative matter." For his part. Mr. Sheng said he believes things will change. ?Straight or gay. my generation sees homophobia as being openly racist.? he said. Washington Post March 18. 2010 Pg. 3 38. Compensation Exams Need To Be Expedited VA medical centers need to speed up compensation and pension medical exams to veterans so that it can expedite disability claims. the department's inspector general reported Wednesday. At a facility in Roscburg. Ore. hundreds of requests for an exam were tucked in ?le cabinets so a timeliness quota could be met. And claims at an outpatient clinic in Winston-Salem. were processed out of order also to help with the quota, the IG said. The chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. Daniel K. Akaka, says VA needs to devote more resources to ?xing the problem. VA has told the inspector general it will do that. -- Associated Press New York Times March 13. 2010 39. In Biathlon. War Veteran Revels In Latest Challenge By Katie Thomas As a boy growing up in California and then Texas. Andy Soule was not much of an athlete. ?He liked to play Logos and draw and those kinds of things." recalled his mother, Debbie Soule. He did not take to Little League or soccer. In high school. Soulc ran track and cross-country. making the varsity team in high school and winning a few medals. But ?he wasn?t a star by any means,? his mother said. "He was just a member ofthe team." Soulebronze medalist. He was third in the SEA-kilometer. or .49-mile. pursuit sitting biathlon event Saturday. becoming the first American to win a medal at the Paralympic Games in Vancouver and Whistler. British Columbia. and the ?rst American in history to win a medal in biathlon. He placed fourth Wednesday in the [ZS-kilometer. or lilo-mile. sitting event and shot perfectly. hitting all 20 of the targets during the race. Soulc?s journey to the Paralympics began in 2005. Two months after he was deployed to Afghanistan with the Army. an explosive device went off under the truck in which he was riding. Both of his legs were later amputated above the knee. While recovering at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio. Soule threw himself into athletics. sampling sports like fencing and sitting volleyball. During a handeycling event in San Antonio. Settle said, he met Marc Mast. who ran a training program for disabled skiers in Idaho. ?He felt that I had potential to be a good Nordic sit-skier. based on seeing me Soule said. couldn?t be a soldier. certainly not in the infantry anymore. I needed something new to challenge me." Soulc entered the Army in 2002. motivated by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 1 1. He also felt lost at Texas where he was ajunior. was burned out on college." he said. wasn?t doing well-" Biathlon was a good ?t because it combined an endurance sport and shooting. Soule grew up visiting a shooting range with his father, 971 5 who is retired from the Air Force. and felt comfortable with a rifle. Paralympic and cross-country skiers who do not have the use of their legs race in special chairs attached to skis. Soule accepted Mast's invitation in 2005 and traveled to Sun Valley. Idaho. to attend a development camp for beginning skiers. In 2006. he moved there to train ?ill time and quickly made his mark. Soule won a silver medal at the national championships in 2007. and ?nished in the top 10 in two World Cop races the same year. On Thursday, Settle finished behind three biathletes from Russia. which so far has dominated the Paralympics just weeks after its team was widely thought to have at the Olympics. As of Thursday. Russian athletes had won 8 gold medals and 23 medals over all. The United States. which won the overall medal count at the Olympics. is in sixth place. with one gold medal and four medals over all. Sonle is also competing in cross-country skiing and will race in two more events. ?When he was injured. I knew he would walk again, I knew he would have a normal life.? Debbie Soule said. ?But I couldn't even dream that he would do something like this. This is pretty amazing." Washington Post March 18. 2010 Pg. 14 40. Air Force Proceeds With Lockheed Deal The Air Force said it will request $6.5 billion, or four years of Funding, for a Lockheed Martin military communications program that plans to launch its first satellite in September after six years of delays. The funding request for ?scal years 2012-2015. part of a $9.9 billion program. suggests that delays and technical problems have been worked out. \w Bethesda-based Lockheed and its top subcontractor. Northrop Grumman. have been awarded contracts for the ?rst three of six planned satellites. -- Bionmberg News The Hill March 18. 2010 41. Northrop Draws A Line In Sand On Tanker Price By Roxana Tiron Northrop Grumman's announcement backing out of the competition for the Air Force's $35 billion refueling aircratt contract included a ?nal parting shot at main rival Boeing. At the end of its six-paragraph stateman Northrop President and CEO Wes Bush released the price that Northrop and its partner. EA US. had negotiated with the Pentagon during a previous competition to build the tanker. Northrop believes that price. $184 million. should effectively be the cost ceiling the Air Force pays for its new tanker. Bush said the Air Force should ?expect the bill to be much less? for the Boeing tanker. Randy Belote, Northrop?s vice president for strategic communications. on Wednesday reaf?n-ncd his company's belief that Boeing?s tankers should cost less because the 3'6? aircraft is smaller than the 111330-200 Northrop and EADS offered. Belotc said he was reacting to criticism Northrop received for including the price in its exit announcement. Some said the $184 million price was irrelevant because it relates to a different tanker contract that Boeing successfully challenged. Northrop~EADS initially won a competition against Boeing to build the tankers in 2008. but Boeing protested that award with the Govertunent Accountability Of?ce (GAO). Pentagon of?cials then reopened the competition. 00165 page 3? in an e-mail Wednesday. Belotc again noted that the Pentagon agreed to a $184 million per-aircraft price for the ?rst ?ll A330-based tanker aircraft. including the non-recurring development costs. "With the department?s decision to procure a much smaller. less capable design, the taxpayer should certame expect the bill to be much less than the $184 million per tanker that the Air Force would have paid Northrop Grumman for the more modern. more capable KC-45 rc fueling tanker.? Belotc said. Lawmakers from Alabama. where Northrop planned to build the tanker. had expressed concern that tanker costs could increase if Northrop followed through on threats to pull out of what it said was an unfair competition that favored Boeing's bid. Pentagon of?cials now face the challenge of negotiating a ?xed-price contract within budget after aiming to drive down costs through competition. The Pentagon so far has not announced any changes to the bidding process to accommodate a sole bidder. A defense analyst said Northrop may have helped the Pentagon in its negotiations with Boeing in releasing the $184 million price. "There might be factions in the Pentagon that wanted them to bid to keep Boeing?s bid competitive. and this might be a minimum way of showing support for the Pentagon by helping to keep Boeing's bid competitive." said Richard Aboula?a. vice president of analysis at the Teal Group. ?We are 100 percent focused on submitting a fully responsive. transparent and competitive tanker proposal to the Air Force. ?Boeing recognich it must earn the tanker contract by providing the Air Force with a modern and capable tanker that meets or exceeds all war?ghter requirements and is L.r?i ?r lt-?l. ind-Oi cost?effective to buy. own and operate." said Boeing spokesman Bill Barksdalc. Pentagon acquisition chief Ashton Carter said the ?rst two lots of the new liq-tanker fleet will be purchased at a ?rm ?y-by-wire refueling boom. to the prior one. with fixed price. while the data Should it be chosen to Northrop escalationy" he said. "And remaining lots will use a ?not provide the Air Force with a Grumman-EABS won a we're trying ?to drive to a to exceed" structure and replacement ?eet far its aging contract to boild 179 tankers number that Will Win." economic price adjustment 1.10135 tanker aircraft based on the Airbus A33tl for 1 Albaugh added that provisions to protect "both "we have told the Air the Air Force in February be a program_that can taxpayers and industry." Force and the Department Dr 2008. The contract was generate about $3 billion ayear Boeing has defended the Defense maE they.? get full canceled when US. auditors in round numbers for the Pentagon?s bidding process for insight into mm and upheld a Boeing protest tied to Boeing Company.? the tanker program. sayingthit pricing informatiom and they AirI forged missteps to did not over - - eva uating is. I Chicagorhascd company. sslg?ili?grf?ig??rg? Northrop Grumman CEO Ecmspacc Dailyd't Defense Boning Of?cials are already aviation division. "We're going was Bush a March 8 letter 13 3010 working to dispel any to be fully transparent on to Pentagon of?cials outlining Paula . perceptions that the company his company's reasons for 8- would take advantage of the Gangr?simul supporters dropping out of the bidding, 43- Hovenug I situation. of indmw rival Nurmrop warned the government not to Lmkheed Ma?lns ?rst ?We remain in a Grumman have warned than overpay l'orancw?tattker. Bush F3513 competitive situation," Tirn Since that cump??yls decision noted that the Air Force had Kcating, Boeing?s senior vice Transparency Amid Sole-Source Concerns By Marina Malcnic A top Boeing of?cial said yesterday that the company to drop out of the contest, the May It}. The company said earlier this month that it plans to modernize its 767 commercial aircraft with a new digital ?ight deck from its 737 Dreamlincr. as well as a new planned to pay a unit ?yaway page 3! specify. But he said that a ?nal price would not be far removed from its 2008 bid. "The expectation. certainly of the Air Force, is that it will be a number reasonably close [Stovl) aircraft demonstrated resident for government - cost of approximately $lB4 the capability to hover gperations. said at a meeting rglgi?nov; a: million per tanker for the ?rst March l'i'during a test flight at with reporters March Boeing 63 A33??based aircraft Naval Air Station Panixcnt ?There isacontract we have to Grumman proposed by Northrop River. Md. aircraft took win. We have not won it yet." last week that it Grumman-EADS--a number off conventionally. then pilot Northrop Grumman blamed the Pentagon bidding process for its decision to pull would not bid for the work, alleging that the Air Forcds request for proposals outlined that included the non?recurring development costs. "With the Department's Graham Tomlinson slowed it to 60 knots and ?ew a decelerating approach to zero out. It said the process favored '35l manth favors Boeingts decision to procure a much airspeed at 150 feet above the the smaller refueling aircra? smaller tanker. Hump smaller, less capable design. runway. After completing all offered by Boeing. and that the indusuy p?m?r. the taxpayer should certainly hover test points, NorthroprEADS team had little chance to win the contract even if it spent millions on the competition. Northrop?s decision to pull Airbus parent company EADS North America, has remained quiet about its intentions. Albaugh Said that Boeing is still operating under the expect the bill to be much less." he wrote. Albaugh yesterday told reporters that Boeing continuos to work on driving doivn the executed a Stovl landing at 70 knots airspeed. according to Lockheed. Later in the day. performed the first F-JS short takeoff too. out has created tension assumption that mere will he a cost of the in? commercial between the European Union competition fur m3 work. aircraft on which its tanker washingmn Post and the ??lled Stales' which Pentagon officials have wui?ld be basgd? He 531d ll]: Mal-ch13 so?) European of?cials have} said mum be worth up to $50 rfnajor cost-putting ifforgoge? Pg 19 accused the United States - rom comp a ra . protectionism. arguing the the llfe 0f the modifications to the aircraft on The Pentagon changed "Um. assumption i5u his the main production intern Sples I speci?cations for the new going to be Everett. Wash..before shipping By David Ignatius tanker to favor Boeing. French President Nicolas Albaiigh said. "In the event that it's not, they're going to go it to Wichita, Kan, for integration of mission systems. The headline read like something you might see in the Sarkozy is expected to share thwugh a" the wait and pricing "The original . way? that conspiracy-minded Pakistani his gripes with President information in excruciating we've done derivative aircraft press: Contractors Tied to Baraek Dbama when he visits demll And wc-rc going to in the past has been to ?y it to Effort it: Track and Kill the White House later this make sum they have full access Wichita cut it up. and putit Militants. I But the! story month. and that we're tom?), back together again." he said. appeared in Mondays New Defense Daily transparent on that." Boeing has said that it will "This is new a much more ef?cient way to build the airplane. and it will drive the York Times, and it highlighted some big problems that have developed in the murky area mu Pg. 1 ?Lhasa-1 refueling airman in Asked how lar the intelligence actiwtics. . 42.Boeing Pledges aproposalit plansm submit an company aims to drive that The starting Ipoml for Tanker Cost cost. Albaugh would not understanding this covert Hill. arcs. EXHIBIT it Mr) .., ManningB_OD409?16 Ch: :53 Oi"- Intrigue Is that the military has lon been unhappy about the quality of CIA intelligence in Afghanistan. The frustration surfaced publicly in January in a report by t' top military intelligence off in Kabul, Maj. Gen. T. that began: "Ii-"Ff" years into the war in Afghanistan, the U.S. intelligence community is only marginally relevant to the overall strategy." It's a complicated tale, but it has some simple lessons: Under the heading of operations" or "force protection," the military has launched intelligence activities that. were they conducted by the CIA. might require a presidential ?nding and noti?cation of Congress. And by using contractors who operate "outside the wire? in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the military has gotten informatiort that is sometimes better than what the CIA is offering. A reconstruction of what happened. based on conversations with a half-dozen military and intelligence contests, raise-S crucial issues: What new military procedures are needed to bring "information operations" and related activities under better control?? And how can the CIA improve its own collection efforts so that private contractors brought in to ?ll the gaps? The outsourced intelligence operation described by the Times began in 2008 with a push from the Pentagon's Strategic Command, which oversees information operations. A Stratcorn civilian named Michael D. Furlong began funding former journalists to provide "ground truth." with a planned budget of$22 million. Another private intelligence effort was launched in November 2008. when a Boston ?rm called American International Security Corp. was hired by the New York Times to free its reporter David Rohde. who had been kidnapped by the Taliban that month. The ?rm tamed to Duane "Dewey" Clarridge. a former CIA of?cer who launched the agency's counterterrorism center in 1936 and was an important ?gure in the Iran-contra affair. He set about building a network of informants who could help free Robdc. Rohde escaped in June 2009. but Clan?idge's network continued to function. It currently has about 1 0 operatives who act as case of?cers. drawn from the United States. Britain. South Africa and other countries. These of?cers. in tum. run about 20 "principal agents" who are in contact with roughly 40 sources in Afghanistan and Pakistan. (.?Iarridge had been in contact with US. Special Operations Command in Tampa since March 2009 to share information and to make sure that his private network wouldn*t clash with US. operatives. He is said to have briefed both Adm. Eric Olson. the head of SOCOM, and Lt. Gen. David Fridovich, the director of its center for special operations. Clarridge's contacts with the military deepened last July a?er be provided detailed intelligence about an Army soldier, Pfc. Howe Bergdahl. who had been captured by the Taliban in eastern Afghanistan. The two outsourced operations linked up in mid-2009. after Furlong met one of Clanidgc?s operatives in Dubai. In October, the military aWardcd a contract for several million dollars to Clarridge and AISC through a series of subcontractors. The CIA, meanwhile. was llummoxed by Clan?idge's freelancing. The new chief of station in Kabul protested last summer, and lawyers drew up new rules. Clarridge?s mission was described as "force protection." a normal military activity in a war zone. His unclassi?ed reports were fed into the .l-3 operations center in Kabul. and then often classi?ed and disseminated though intelligence channels. Clanidge's reports carried the rubric "Force Protection Atmospherics." His sources were described as "cooperators" and his effort was termed "commercially gathered? data. rather than intelligence collection. But these semantics didn't resolve the tension between military activities. which fall under Title. 10 of the US. Code. and covert action, which is authorized under Title 50. This gray area has led Adm. Dennis Blair. the director of national intelligence, to argue privately that the country may need what could be described as a new "Title 60." that blends the two in a coherent framework with proper controls. The case of the clandestine contractors should prompt a serious debate about creating such a Title 60. and about the military"s rules for information operations. Meanwhile. Clarridge's private network continues to provide fresh intelligence. His latest report from Palttia province was disseminated on Monday, the same day the New York Times article appeared. New York Times March IS. 2010 45. A Politically Feasible Jet There has been yet another setback in the Air Force?s long, agonizing process to replace its ?eet of Eisenhower?era aerial refueling planes. Northrop Grumman and its European partner. the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company. dropped out of the competition this month, charging that the new contract Speci?cations are tilted against their much larger Airbus A330 in favor of Boeing's 7'67. That leaves the Pentagon with only one bid hardly a recipe to get the best tanker 00167 page 32 fleet at the best cost. From a capabilities standpoint. we could see advantages in both planes. The Pentagon says that between the two rounds of bidding, it developed a more precise idea of what it needed. But its repeated flip-?ops feed suspicions that politics and lobbying are what mattered most. Boeing's Capitol Hill supporters mainly from Washington State built a case around stars. stripes and American jobs and, by implication. against a consortium that had. gasp, a European partner. For American taxpayers and their armed forces to get the best possible tanker ?eet or other military equipment for the money. quali?ed European partners must be permitted to compete fairly. For the record. the Airbus tankers would have been assembled in Alabama. The nation's European allies are now understandably charging protectionism. This could cause problems down the road for the American defense industry, the biggest military exporter in the world. The tanker tale is also one more reminder of why the Pentagon needs to clean up its procurement process and how much further it has to go. despite Defense Secretary Robert Gatcs's pledges of reform. The ?rst attempt to replace the tankers came to grief in 2004. Senator John McCain scuttled a cozy, tailor-made deal to lease Boeing jets. unearthing evidence that an Air Force of?cial had tried to get a job at Boeing while she was handling negotiations over the lease. The Pentagon then ordered an auction for a $40 billion contract to buy the planes. But when the Air Force decided for the Airbus, Eccing and its favorite lawmakers cried foul. The Government Accountability Of?ce agreed with Boeing. arguing that the Air Force favored Northrop: arcs. EXHIBIT rs nae) pgsu 04.313 ManningB_00409717 page 33 giving it points for size although the specs didn't call for a bigger plane; giving Northrop advice along the way; and cutting it slack on several reql he Air Force went back drawing board to craft Widelines for the bidding. The rest is history. Both jets have pros and cons. The Airbus is bigger and can carry bigger hauls of fuel or cargo. Boeing's jets are smaller and cheaper not to be frowned at in these lean times. Unfortunately. it doesn?t seem to matter. The Air Force seems stuck with the politically feasible jet. It might be the best one, but it might not Washington Post March 18. 2010 Pg. 2 46. Correction A March 17 Economy 3: Business article, about accusations in Europe that the Pentagon altered speci?cations for a new refueling tanker plane to favor Boeing in its competition For the contract against a consortium that includes Europe?s Airbus, incorrectly referred to the Boeing as? as new. The jetliner, a military version of which is a contender for the contract1 has been in service since 1982. Editor's Note: The article by Edward Cody appeared in the Current News Eoriy Bird, March 17. 2010. -3 INV. OFBR. EXHIBIT it HUG ManninQB_00409T13 0; 5?5 Closed Hearing Checklist All spectators have been cleared out of the courtroom. 99/ All remaining personnel possess a valid, SJA issued security badge. Guards are posted outside courtroom entrances. Classified recording equipment is in place. g7 Audio and video feed to the M00 and the theater has been severed. '5 Signed Time rive Date 1 BFCR. EXHIBIT Open Hearing Checklist Classified display laptop (if used) is disconnected and secured. Secured all classified material from the l0 Support Paralegal. 7 Secured all classified material from the TC. Secured all classified material from the DC. Secured all classified material from the IO. The courtroom safe is locked. Unclassified recording equipment is in place. Signed Time 557 Date 4' 3 ?ll/H A?nl HIV. UFBR. EXHIBH #la IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT UNITED STATES DEFENSE ASSERTION OF v. PRIVILEGE UNDER M.R.E. 503 MANNING, Bradley E., PFC U.S. Anny, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, DATED: 19 December 2011 Fort Myer, VA 22211 1. PFC Bradley E. Manning, by and through counsel. pursuant to Military Rule of Evidence (M.R.E.) 503, asserts privilege over conversations with Mr. Adrian Lamo. 2. The privilege under M.R.E. 503 protects communications made as a formal act of religion or conscience. This privilege may be claimed by the penitent. United States v. Napoleon, 46 M.J. 279 For the privilege to apply, the following must be true: a. The communication must be made either as a formal act of religion or as a matter of conscience; b. be made to a clergyman in his or her capacity as a spiritual advisor or to a clergyman?s assistant in his or her capacity as an assistant to a spiritual advisor; AND c. be intended to be con?dential. Id. 3. When a chaplain meets with a penitent, M.R.E. 503 allows the disclosing person to prevent the chaplain from disclosing the contents of the statement when it was made as a formal act of religion or as a matter of conscience. United States v. Banner, 57 MJ. 210 (C.A.A.F. 2002); see also United States v. Shelton. 64 MJ. 32 (C.A.A.F. 2006)(holding that communications made to a civilian minister acting as a marital counselor were covered by the privilege). 4. in this case, PFC Manning had a conversation with Mr. Adrian Lamo between 20 May and 26 May 2010. The conversation with Mr. Lamo began with Mr. Lamo stating ?I?m ajournalist and a minister. You can pick either, and treat this as a confession or an interview (never to be published) enjoy a modicum of legal protection." PFC Manning accepted this offer by continuing the conversation. 5. Shortly after extending an offer to treat the conversation as a confession or an interview, Mr. Lamo asked PFC Manning if he wanted to go to the press. PFC Manning replied that he did not. Later, PFC Manning told Mr. Lamo ?but im (sic) not a source for im (sic) talking to you as someone who needs moral and emotional fucking support.? Mr. Lama responded, ?i (sic) told you, none of this is For print." Ira. are. ermine-v-01" i 0? 6. The subsequent conversation over the 20 May through 26 May 2010 time period indicates clearly that PFC Manning engaged in the conversation as a matter of conscience; he was seeking guidance from Mr. Lamo in his capacity as a spiritual advisor; and he intended the conversation to be con?dential. First, PFC Mamting discussed numerous sensitive personal topics with Mr. Lame, including the moral struggles he was dealing with in a deployed environment. Second, PFC Manning repeatedly sought guidance and advice from Mr. Lame. Finally, PFC Manning used an message provider in order to ensure the communication with Mr. Lamo was con?dential. I Under the above facts, PFC Bradley E. Manning, by and through counsel, pursuant to Military Rule of Evidence (M.R.E.) 503, asserts privilege over all the conversations with Mr. Adrian Lamo. VID E. COOMBS Civilian Defense Counsel DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY UNITED STATES ARMY MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 210 A STREET FORT LESLEY J. MCNAIR, DC 20319-5013 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF ANJA-CL 20 December 20 1 MEMORANDUM FOR LTC Paul Almanza, 150th Judge Advocate General Detachment, Legal Support Organization, MG Albert C. Lieber USAR Center, 6901 Telegraph Road, Alexandria, Virginia 22310 SUBJECT: Response to Defense Assertion of Privilege under MRE 503 1. The United States requests you deny Defense Assertion of Privilege under Military Rule of Evidence (MRE) 503. 2. The Military Rules of Evidence shall not apply in pretrial investigations, with the exception of, inter alia, Section privileges. See Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 405(i). MRE 503(a) protects ?a con?dential communication by the person to a clergyman. . . if such communication is made either as a formal act of religion or as a matter of conscience.? MRE 503(a). The elements to assert this privilege include: (1 the communication musr be made either as a formal act of religion or as a matter of conscience; it must be made to a clergyman in his capacity as a spiritual advisor; and (3) the communication must be intended to be con?dential. See United States v. Shelton, 64 MJ. 32 (C.A.A.F. 2006). The burden rests with the party asserting the privilege. See United States v. Darbin, 68 MJ. 271 (C .A.A.F. 2010). 3. The defense alleges that the accused made admissions as a matter of conscience. A communication is ?not privileged, even it?made to a clergyman. if it is made for emotional support and consolation rather than as a tbrmal act of religion or as a matter of conscience.? United States v. Napolean, 46 NM. 279 (C.A.A.F. 1997) (citing United States v. Cataman, 26 MJ. 407 (C.M.A. 1988)). In Napoleon, the privilege did not apply because the facts suggested that the accused "was seeking emotional support and consolation, not guidance or forgiveness." Id, at 285 (emphasis added). Here, the accused admitted he was "talking to [Mr. Lamo] as someone who need[ed] moral and emotional support.? This admission confirms the communication is not privileged. A ?matter of conscience? is privately held within a person.? Shelton, 64 MJ. at 32. In Shelton, an admission was made as a matter of conscience given the religious connotation with which the admission was provided. See id (the meeting began with a prayer, took place in a church, and included religious atmosphere and spiritual language, such as ?you claim to be a Christian, Christians don?t tell lies?); see also United States v. Ishanr, 48 MJ. 603 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 1998) {admissions with "obvious religious overtones" qualify as matters of conscience). At no point did the accused seek guidance in conscience, defined as ?the moral sense of right or wrong." Black?s Law Dictionary (9th ed. 2009). The accused admitted that he was ?godless? and that he has ?always been too intellectual. . .for religion." The communication is boastful, not a matter of conscience. The accused bragged he would "?listen[] and lip-sync[] to Lady Gaga?s Telephone while ex?ltrating (sic) possibly the largest data spillage in American history." The accused bragged about his contacts and exploits and argued HIV. arcs. . ANJA-CL SUBJECT: Response to Defense Assertion of Privilege under MRE 503 ?information should be free? and in the ?public domain.? The accused sought recognition. not forgiveness, for his acts. For these reasons, the accused did not make his admissions as a matter of conscience. 4. A communication is ??con?dential? if made to clergyman in the clergyman?s capacity as a spiritual advisor. . .and not intended to be disclosed to third MRE 503(b)(3). The admission fails this element for three reasons. First, MI. Lamo was not a clergyman under military law. A ?clergyman? is ?intended to mean a person ?regularly engaged in activities conforming at least in a general way with those of a Catholic priest, Jewish rabbi, or minister of an established Protestant denomination.? Napoleon, 46 MJ. at 279 (citing S. Saltzburg M. Martin, Federal Rules of Evidence Manual 601-02 (5th ed. 1990). Mr. Lame allegedly earned a ministerial certi?cation online, but does not regularly engage in religious activities or advertise his religious beliefs. Accordingly, Mr. Lamo is not a clergyman under this privilege and the accused had no reasonable belief otherwise. Second, the accused did not con?de with Mr. Lamo in his clerical capacity. Mr. Lamo informed the accused that he was ?ajournalist and a minister? and that the accused "[could] pick either, and treat this as a confession or an interview (never to be published) enjoy a modicum of legal protection." The accused responded ?Assange level?". ignoring Mr. Lamo?s alleged religious position and instead focusing on his status as a journalist. The accused admitted Mr. Lamo's relationship with WikiLeaks was ?how [he] noticed [Mn Lamo]" and maintained a video titled ?Hackers Wanted? starring Mr. Lamo, a renowned computer hacker, on the desktop of his personal computer. The accused quickly learned oer. Lamo?s sexual orientation and continued contact with him to cope with his alleged feeling of isolation. The accused initiated and continued contact with Mr. Lamo for these purposes, not for clerical guidance. The defense presents no evidence that the accused sought out Mr. Lamo for any other reason. 5. The clerical privilege ?recognizes the human need to disclose to a spiritual counselor, in total and absolute confidence, what are believed to be ?awed acts or thoughts and to receive priestly consolation and guidance in return." Trommel v. United States, 445 US. 40, 51 {1980). Protecting these chat logs as privileged communications violates the very spirit of the privilege. At no point did the accused admit any wrongdoing or request guidance in return. Instead, the accused praised the ?highlights? of his misconduct with the overarching objective ?to witness[] the world freak out as its most intimate secrets [were] revealed.? 6. The point of contact for this memorandum is CPT J. Hunter Whyte - I Encl ANGEL M. RGAARD Chat Logs (BATES 00124132-00124149) CPT. .l A Trial Counsel tut. new. rte-ab" l'-J 5' Closed Hearing Checklist All spectators have been cleared out of the courtroom. All remaining personnel possess a valid, SJA issued security'badge. H, Guards are posted outside courtroom entrances. Classified recording equipment is in place. Audio and video feed to the M00 and the theater has been severed. 974? Signed 2- Timef?i 2 Date?! "212044 I/xl Lyn/(ix! Hill. UFBR. EXHIBIT #:Lo Ht}; Open Hearing Checklist Classified display laptop (if used) is disconnected and secured. Secured all classified material from the 10 Support Paralegal. Secured all classified material from the TC. Secured all classified material from the DC. Secured all classified material from the IO. The courtroom safe is locked. Unclassified recording equipment is in place. 0 . LJAE 1' Pl 3 Time Date ligag/g INV. UFCR. EXHIBIT Shun-fa y-E?i-r; Wm'maimblae?am Ease: pf Use: Elliermaac?m? ?J'Iersian waited with 252?: 2% 2 373?: 52$ tersun?pm-n: Lira Miailx? ema? ?Mr-:55; dam Iv: and! um: an (mu-30k CA1. a mm:er sitwr. t?i?ws?icrt: Dmsp?ng the Gin-L to fix-mi prawn; ar: last in a that can. searims; a: summarized. I raccsmiy was? a pm?: mat was 931mm and I i-nught am}! a ma;me c? has mohai-i phone mmber. was able to Qu?dciy' ?nd mas Ezra-man's dinette by the Extra! feat. CM aim we used ta ma?a Mama?s-as An the GAL ta ?tter the H-ILW use: Laban-t .6- TQF P. Teal the Sample Frie: 911-3 3969 {span Hut Air?#911 viz-an the ?aw sass: Emit-3r 2:er m-?erm, :huvse M?di?-i. ?re twin: mm the WW whims: 31 mg?. hi?tb?. VIBE, Tue-ta - rtecfexmmes arms smL- chunk Mums-aft (11.30 1.21 unis? {hum nib-e. uri?. amt saw: lh'r ?ap: Maxim. the mach: aw gci?g Twis-Macm-Macmi and dwhienciiciz 5mm. INV. UFCR. ?5 aka-{g i? it; imaging; 1 . #31: e: vmmg'? 5 Mme year-ch t9: 3, Exizaci Ema? ?a?a $1'r?3m mama Siaba? Addmaa List - 133A Exp. . Phi . .?a'it'il'ff?i . 5:233:53 ?re dzgta?e? 9mm d?iesg 5.35333 far each die: from an Ou?eok GM. a Bwap?ag {Eva GAL Ea: Exist}? pm?i?es an ?at ire a farm ?5353 @553?- Run the macm Tao?es- watt-aim acme; 3.4m dwbif: mm G?t??i ?35m: Qg?wk a 3mg: i" *4 1- - ya Can a?ytaaziy 295$ me ham 3% waum aims at new Mask m?sag? 51 O??aok GAL. 5 car: was: O-u?aok wing 331%: maaim: ?3222 Gioha? Address banal-t? Ema; Hm: Elam: ??aip ma?a A Le?. -. mam yea-.5151 'r-mm $355313! man-:1; 5. ?rms Liam Ems E?i'i'ffmLuann Iii-era an; 39 gave a raft: 95m: {hit macro g9 39 the ?ab-335:? inset33:25:. 321 Games: 3.71amme - .3 - - .- fa?ma regain: Era-.311 ?if?rii? arms 12 {wt Ef?ifi's Mfg; mm: gilt h: :31: E?mw hefty-5'3 32-5? E. - . . a attacks Giobai Address List? are ins-a?-markimjg a: macro if; ?ak $533 that. whim ?amed. V521: 21:42:: {35% 2M Exi?mwge (Babel Lisx my a streamer- I. (1:40:51 bradass87 has not been authenticated yet. You should authenticate this buddy. (1:40:51 Unveri?ed conversation with bradassB7 started. {1:41:12 hi {1:44:04 how are you? {1:47:01 bradassa'o?: im an army intelligence analyst. deployed to eastern baohdad. pending discharge for "adiustment disorder" in lieu of ?gender identity disorder" {1:56:24 brada5587: im sure you're pretty {1:58:31 PMibradassE?: if you had unprecedented access to classified networks 14 hours a day 7 days a week for 8+ months. what would you do? {1:58:31 info@adrianlamo.com Tired of being tired {2:17:29 bradassB7: {8:07:29 infofdiadrianlamocom: What?s your {3:16:24 bradassB7: re: "What?s your Intelligence Analyst (33) (3:16:24 info@adrianlamo.com Tired of being tired {10:13:20 bradassB7: The message received from bradassa'r' is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (10:13:27 Unveri?ed conversation with bradassB? started. (10:13:27 bradassB7: [resent] (10:15:29 bradassa7: so yeah (10:15:41 AM) bradassBT: im in a sticky (10:16:56 bradass?7: its nice to meet you only starting to familiarize myself with whats available in open source (10:17:45 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: open source or (10:17:51 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Pleased to meet you. {10:17:54 AM) same deal (10:19:00 AM) bradassST: im kind of coming out of a its going to take some time. buti hopefully wont be a ghost anymore (10:19:53 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: You mentioned gender identity, I believe. (10:19:59 AM) bradassai': ive had an unusual. and very stressful experience over the last decade or so (10:20:53 bradassB7: questioned my gender for several sexual orientation was easy to ?gure but i started to come to terms with it during the first few months of my deployment Page 1 of 43 m. arcs. We) 00180 (10:21:09 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: May ask the particulars? (10:21:34 AM) I?m bi myself. and my ex is MTF. (10:21:34 AM) bradassBT: fairly but careful. so yes.. (10:22:00 AM) im aware of your bi part (10:22:24 AM) bradassB7: uhm. trying to keep a low profile for now though, just a warning (10:23:34 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: I?m a journalist and a minister. You can pick either. and treat this as a confession or an interview (never to be published) 8: enjoy a modicum of legal protection. (10:24:07 AM) assange level? {10:25:12 AM) or are you socially engineering (10:25:51 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: You must not have done your research (10:25:57 AM) into@adrianlamo.com: i could have ?ipped for the FBI. (10:26:05 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Gotten a sweeter deal. (10:26:10 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Before they fucked up. (10:26:14 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: And I got one anyway. (10:26:14 AM) bradassBT: indeed (10:26:16 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: I held out. (10:27:04 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: I know what being in a little room haying U.S. Code its consequences explained to you by people who don?t smile is like. (10:22:06 AM) btw. reminds saw a USAF report mentioning something about an "Adrian Lamo" being in possession of French classi?ed material (10:2?:57 AM) it flips both ways Title 10. Section 654 of US Code (10:23:06 AM) bradassBT: (DADT) (10:28:29 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Of course. you could be false flagging me. I say "Can I see it?" and bam, I'm a criminal. (10:28:52 AM) do they do that? (10:29:10 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: You don't know? (10:29:33 AM) bradassBT: no FBI is the only beast i know nothing about (10:29:43 AM) bradassS?f: i play with foreigners (10:29:46 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: They have a grudge. (10:30:09 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: They had to apologize for how they handled my case. In public. (10:30:13 AM) brad-3358?: CIA. NSA. those are whati know (10:30:15 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: To the press. (10:30:25 AM) inf0@adrianlamo.com: They _hate_ that. (10:30:32 AM) bradassS'i?: PR games (10:30:57 AM) info@adrianlarno.com: My ?le runs 3000 pages. I don?t know how typical that is. (10:31 AM) bractass?i?: yery atypical (10:31:16 AM) bradassB?: im sorry i dont have access to LES material (10:31 :29 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: I wouldn't ask you to use such access. (10:31 :40 AM) brads-13587: i know, i'd offer it (10:31:53 AM) hold on (10:33:28 AM) bradassa'i': this is what i do for friends: http:iibit.lyraLqui (10:35:14 AM) bradassa'f: [the one below it is mine too] Page 2 of 43 [10:35:30 AM) bradass?h >sigh< (10:36:46 AM) bradassB7: living such an opaque life. has forced me never to take transparency, openness. and honesty for granted {10:37:31 AM) hradassBT: {10:38:37 AM) info@adriantamo.corn: I've been a friend to Wikileaks - l've repeatedly asked people who download Hackers Wanted to donate. (10:38:44 AM) info@adrianlarno.com: And donated myself. {10:38:49 AM) bradass?'I: i know (10:33:59 AM) actually how i noticed you (10:39:20 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Whether I?ve given material. isn?t material. Semi~pun intended. (10:39:28 AM) during my usual open source collection [twitten newsgooglecom, etc] [10:40:03 AM) bradassBT: >nod< {10:40:51 AM) they?ve got a lot of ammunition. its the support they need from the public in publishing the material coming through soon [10:41:42 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: In general terms. have you seen my name anywhere else l'rn not aware of? specify no particular venue. {10:41:59 AM) not (10:42:55 AM) bradassa'i': uhm OGA networks have you at results, all OSINT not connected to Law Enforcement stuff (10:44:10 bradassB7: 1 mention of your name with the french classi?ed but it was from a product that is over-written since the producer doesn?t archive. couldn?t access the full bit (10:45:13 AM) bradassB'r': im sorry, if seem kind of creepy (10:45:18 AM) stiflif i (10:45:32 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: You don?t know how creepy my contacts get. (10:45:49 AM) bradass??: how does this one rate {10:46:10 AM) bradassa'l': 1-10 scale perhaps? {10:47:15 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: 7ish. 1H on reliability/quality of data based on statements made. Even odds on being a false flag. {10:47:20 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Nothing personal. (10:47:57 AM) bradassB7: its ok {10:43:00 AM) info@adrianlarno.com: This is dangerous. We learned my lessons in tightropes. (10:48:05 bradassB7: i?ve got time (10:48:43 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Would you know if a speci?c person had authored a repor?paper? {10:49:23 AM) bradass?'r: not [10:49:42 AM) bradassBY: bureaucrats usually aren?t that intelligenti find (10:49:54 bradassB7: [re: false flag] (10:50:03 info@adrianlamo.com: Webster. Timothy D. {10:51:05 who?s that? (10:51:21 bradassa'r': he's an author obviously {10:51:28 bradasstih Sex and Intimacy [goog] Page 3 of 48 (10:51:59 AM) info@adrianlarno.com: SA with NGA (former) (10:52:18 AM) squints (10:52:22 AM) bradassST: >shiyer< (10:53:01 AM) brada5587: squints creep me out (10:53:06 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Specialty FCI in cyber?areas. (10:53:53 AM) bradassa'i?: no (10:54:45 AM) im not really sure where this is apart from awkward weirdness (10:55:31 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: I apologize if I've made you feel awkward. (10:55:37 AM) bradassBT: no. its me (10:55:54 AM) oracles-.587: i said too much too fast (10:55:59 info@adrianlamo.com: He wrote a paper a while back. was curious how it had been received by the IC. (10:56:36 AM) bradassa'l: i guess i can ?nd out. though im restricted to SIPR now. because of the discharge proceedings (10:58:10 AM) bradassB7: am i coming off too quick? ive closed myself off for so (10:58:41 AM) bradass37: ithought i?d reach out to someone who would possibly (10:59:01? AM) brada5587: s? [this person is kind of fragile] (10:59:29 AM) bradassBT: (11:00:53 AM) bradassa7: anyway. i?m going i'll be back in about 30? 40 min? (11:01:39 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: i?ll be around (11:01:43 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: i usually am (11:01:44 AM) bradassai': (11:01:47 AM) hradassBT: (11:01:48 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: around and understanding both (11:02:17 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: be well. and stay out of trouble (11:22:11 AM) wow. that was quick (11:22:50 AM) iguess i can talk a little bit about imean. We really got nothing to lose [i know. sounds desperate] (11:23:19 AM) bradassBT: i was born in central oldahoma. grew up in a small town called crescent. just north of oklahoma city (11:23:59 AM) bradassBT: dad was a manager of computer programmers at hertz corporation. doing legacy maint.. etc (11:24:41 AM) mother was british (speci?cally welsh). married father while he was stationed at an air force base in southwest wales (11:25:18 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: I?m of Scottish 8: Welsh descent. (11:25:22 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: On one side. (11:27:18 AM) bradassBT: i was a short (still am). very intelligent (could read at 3 and multiply divide by 4). very effeminate. and glued to a computer screen at these young ages (MSDOS Windows 3.1 i played SimCity [the original] obsessively (11:27:40 AM) bradass?7: an easy target by (11:28:07 AM) bradass?i?: grew up in a highly evangelical town with more church pews than people (11:28:48 AM) so. i got pretty messed up at "girly boy" ?teacher?s pet". etc Page 4 of 48 (11:29:57 AM) bradassal?: home was the same. alcoholic father and mother was very nice. but very needy father was very wealthy (lots of nice toys 1 computer stuff). but abusive (11:31:07 AM) bradassBT: my favorite things growing up were reading my watching PBS (the only channel i could get on my TV) building with legs. and playing on my dad?s hand-me? down computers (11:31:42 AM) bradassBT: i lived in the middte of nowhere, so i had no neighbors to hang out with. and my dad would never take me anyway. because after work heid hit the bottle (11:32:58 AM) bradass?'l': i was a science fair won grand prize in my town 3 years in a row. and played on the "academic bowl team" as team leader (which meant state championship!) (11:33:45 AM) bradassBT: i didnt like getting beat up or called gay [didn't really know what gay meant. but knew it was semething bad) (11:34:06 AM) bradassa7: so ijoined sports teams, and started becoming an athlete (11:34:15 AM) bradassB'l?: around this time (middle my parents divorced (11:36:34 AM) bradassB'l': my father in a drunken stupor got angry with me because i was doing some noisy homework while he was watching he went into his bedroom. pulled out a shotgun. and chased me out of the the door was deadbolted. so i couldn't get out before he caught up with so my mother (also wasted) threw a lamp over his head. .. and i proceeded to ?ght him. breaking his nose. and made it out of the my father let off one or two shots. causing damage, but injuring nobody. except for the belt lashing i got for "making him shoot up the house? {11:36:59 AM) bradassa'l': i went to school the next day. and my teachers noticed the wounds, and got social workers involved (11:37:11 AM) bradassa'l': he immediately stopped drinking. and my mother filed for divorce (11:37:29 AM) bradassa'l': after the divorce. my mother attempted (11:33:23 AM) bradassST: aftertaking care of her for awhile. and gaining custody of me. my mother took me to her hometown, haverfordwest, to live and go to school (11:38:49 AM) bradasth': i spent four years in the UK. continuing my education (11:39:13 AM) bradassB?: i also started playing around more and more with computers. speci?cially webservers (11:39:54 AM) bradassB7: to try and mitigate various ?nancial problems while going to school. i got the idea with a rather sly friend to form an internet (11:40:25 AM) bradass?ir': archive (11:40:57? AM) bradassB7: we fell out over variOus and the project was ended. luckily without any losses (11:41:57 AM) bradassBT: i learned a lot about running LAMP jazz. routing. as well as the business stuff. PR (11:42:24 AM) bradassB'i': after that fell through. my education started to slip as my mother started getting very ill (11:42:43 AM) she had a minor then a mild and i was getting desperate (11:43:02 AM) bradassS7: so i called my father. and begged him to live in the US again (11:43:19 AM) bradassBT: my passport had expired so i had to travel overnight to Iondon (11:44:11 AM) bradassa'i': i stayed at a hostel in the kings cross area overnight, and left to go to hyde park [where all the embassies are] Page 5 of 48 (11:45:13 bradassB7: what really sucked though, was that as i entered the all hell started breaking there was a horrific boom, screaming. sirens. and thick black it was july 7th {11:45:39 bradassB'l': i panicked and went by foot, not knowing what was going on (11:45:47 info@adrianlamo.com: sorry for latency things demanding my attention are exceeding my capacity to allocate resources, forcing me to double-book mentally: and that only scales so far. (11:46:04 bradassB?: its ok, im just venting a lot (11:47:28 bradassBT: im very isolated lost all of my emotional support family, boyfriend. trusting im a mess (11:49:02 bradass?l': im in the desert. with a bunch of hyper-masculine trigger happy ignorant rednecks as and the only safe place i seem to have is this satellite internet connection (11:49:51 bradassBT: and i already got myself into minor trouble, revealing my uncertainty over my gender which is causing me to lose this and putting me in an awkward limbo (11:50:54 AM) bradassBT: i wish it were as simple as "hey, go transition?. .. but i need to get paperwork financial stuff legal and im still deployed. so i have to redeploy back to the US and be outprocessed (11:52:09 AM) bradassB'l: i could be hanging out here in limbo as a super-intelligent. awkwardly effeminate supply guy [pick up these boxes and move them] for up to two months (11:52:23 AM) bradassBY: at the very least, i managed to keep my security clearance [so far] (11:5?t49 AM) brada558?: im sorry, im a total mess right (11:58:33 bradasst?': and little does anyone know. but among this ?visible? mess, theres the mess i created that no?one knows about yet (11:58:59 bradassB7: i have no idea what im doing right now (12:00:34 bradassB7: im so sorry (12:04:36 info@adrianlamo.com: don't be sorry, just give me a chanCe to read (12:06:18 info@adrianlamo.corn: how did this not come up as an issue in your background check? I?m guessing you have an and not a T8. (12:06:29 TSISCI (12:06:47 PM) bradassBT: i enlisted in height of iraq war. no-one double checked much (12:07:06 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Well. hell, if you made it in, maybe I should reconsider the offer I got from what used to be (12:07:09 bradassB?: background checks are jokes anyway (12:07:23 info@adrianlamo.com: it's hit-or?miss. (12:08:04 bradassBT: wouldn't have been worth it (12:10:21 bradassB7: they are a mess. and wholly dependent on frivolous network security contracts and physically securing networks (12:10:58 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: I doubt they?d hire me to dick around with that. (12:11 :03 PM) bradassal": i've been penetrating *.smi .mil networks for over a year (12:11 :21 PM) bradassBT: as well as *.sgoy.gov (12:11:49 PM) bradassa7: ive created a massive mess (12:12:30 PM) bradassB?: and no-one has a clue, because 95% of efforts are on physical security of classified and managing OPSEC on unclassified networks Page 6 of 48 (12:12:46 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Want to go to the press? (12:12:51 PM) bradassa'i': no (12:12:59 PM) bradassBT: theres an issue with that (12:13:01 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: open offer. (12:15:11 PM) bradassB'l': hypothetical question: if you had free reign over classi?ed networks for long periods of say. 8-9 and you saw incredible things. awful things that belonged in the public domain. and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington what would you do? (12:16:38 PM) bradassBT: or Guantanamo. Bagram. Bucca. Taji. VBC for that (12:17:47 PM) bradassBT: things that would have an impact on 6.7 billion people (12:21:24 PM) bradassBI?: a database of half a million events during the iraq from 2004 to with reports. date time groups. lat-Ion locations. casualty or 260.000 state department cables from embassies and consulates all over the world, explaining how the ?rst world eXploits the third. in detail. from an internal perspective? (12:22:49 PM) bradassB7: the air-gap has been (12:23:19 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: how so? (12:26:09 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: yt? (12:26:09 PM) bradassBT: lets just say *someone" i know intimately well. has been penetrating US classified networks. mining data like the ones and been transferring that data from the classi?ed networks over the ?air gap" onto a commercial network computer. .. sorting the data. compressing it. it. and uploading it to a crazy white haired aussie who can?t seem to stay in one country very long (12:27:13 PM) bradassa'i': im here (12:27:24 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Depends. What are the particulars? (12:28:19 PM) bradassB7: theres substantial tag i think (12:29:52 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: I don't understand. (12:30:13 PM) bradassBY: what was the last message you recieved? (12:30:47 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: (12:28:19 PM) bradassB7: theres substantial lag i think (12:30:56 PM) brads-15587: before that (12:31:09 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: (12:25:09 PM) bradassBT: lets just say *someone' i know intimately well. has been penetrating US classified networks. mining data like the ones and been transferring that data from the classified networks over the "air gap" onto a commercial network sorting the data. compressing it. it. and uploading it to a crazy white haired aussie who can?t seem to stay in one country very long (12:27:13 PM) bradassBT: im here (12:27:24 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Depends. What are the particulars? (12:31:43 PM) bradassBT: crazy white haired dude Julian Assange (12:33:05 PM) bradassBT: in other ive made a huge mess (12:35:17 PM) bradassBT: im im just emotionally fractured (12:39:12 PM) bradassBT: im a total mass (12:41 :54 PM) bradassB7: i think im in more potential heat than you ever were (12:41 :54 PM) info@adrianlamo.com I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. Page 7 of 48 {12:45:59 info@adrianlamo.com: not mandatorin (12:46:08 info@adrianlamo.com: there are always outs (12:46:17 info@adrianlarno.com: how long have you helped Wlkileaks? (12:49:09 PM) bradassB7: since they released the 9H1 ?pager messages" (12:49:38 PM) bradassB?: i immediately recognized that they were from an NBA database. and i felt comfortable enough to come forward (12:50:20 bradassBT: right after thanksgiving timeframe of 2009 (12:52:33 PM) bradassBT: Hilar?ilr Clinton, and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and ?nds an entire repository of classi?ed foreign policy is available; in searchable format to the (12:53:41 brada5587: siHiIarylHitlary PM) info@adrianlamo.com: What sort of content? (12:56:36 PM) info@adrianlarno.com: cigarette (12:56:43 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: keep typing <3 (12:59:41 PM) bradassBT: crazy, almost criminal political the non-PR? versions of world events and all kinds of stuff like everything from the buildup to the Iraq War during Powell, to what the actual content of ?aid packages" is: for instance, PR that the US is sending aid to pakistan includes funding for that much is true. it includes that, but the other 85% of it is for F-16 ?ghters and munitions to aid in the Afghanistan effort. so the US can call in Pakistanis to do aerial bombing instead of americans potentially killing civilians and creating a PR crisis (1:00:57 bradassBT: theres so it affects everybody on everywhere there's a US there's a diplomatic scandal that will be Iceland, the Vatican. Spain. Brazil. Madascar. if its a country. and its recognized by the US as a country, its got dirt on it {1:01:27 bradassB?: i need one myself (1:10:38 PM) bradassB?: its open world-wide anarchy in CSV its Climategate with a global scope, and breathtaking its beautiful. and {1:10:33 info@adrianlamo.ccm I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. (1:1 1 :54 its important that it gets i feel. for some bizarre reason {1:12:02 bradassB'i': it might actually change something (1:13:10 bradassBT: dont wish to be a part of at least not im not i wouldn?t mind going to prison for the rest of my life. or being executed so much, if it wasn't for the possibility of having pictures of plastered all over the world as (1:14:11 bradassBY: i've totally lost my i make no the CPU is not made for this (1:14:42 PM) bradass?7: slas boyias a boy (1:30:32 >sigh< (1:31:40 bradassBT: i just wanted enough time to ?gure myself to be and be running around all the time. trying to meet someone else's expectations (1:32:01 bradassB'r': ?and not be (1:33:03 bradassa7: im just kind of drifting now. . Page 8 of 48 {1:34:11 bradassB?: waiting to redeploy to the US. be and ?gure out how on earth im going to transition {1:34:45 bradassB7: all while witnessing the world freak out as its most intimate secrets are revealed [1:35:06 bradass?7: its such an awkward place to be in, emotionally and [1:35:05 info@adrianlamo.com I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. {L39m3 bradassBT: i cant believe what im confessing to you {1:40:20 bradassBT: ive been so isolated so i iust wanted to be nice. and live a normal but events kept forcingme to ?gure out ways to smart enough to know whats going on. but helpless to do anything. .. no-one took any notice of me [1:40:43 oracles-.587: [1:43:51 info@adrianlamg.Cgm: back [1:43:59 im self medicating like crazy when im not toiling in the suoolv of?ce (my new location. since im being discharged. im not officallv intel anymore} (1:44:11 bradassB?: you missed a (1:45:00 info@adrianlamo.com: what kind of scandal? {1:45:16 bradass?7: hundreds of them 1:45:40 PM info adrianlamo.com: like what? I?m enuinel curious about details. (1:46:01 bradass?'i': i dont theres so 1 dont have the original material anymore (1:46:13 bradassBT: the Holy See and its position on the Vatican sex scandals {1:46:26 info@adrianlamo.com: plav it by ear {1:46:29 bradassa'l: the broiling one in Germm {1:47:36 bradassBT: im sorry. there's so its impossible for any one human to read all and not feel and possibly desensitized (1:48:20 bradass?T: the scope is so and yet the death so rich [1:48:50 info@gdrianlamo.com: give me some bona ?des vanno? any specifics. (1:49:40 this one was a test: Classi?ed cable from US Embassv Revkiavik on Icesave dated 13 Jan 2010 (1:50:30 bradassBT: the result of that one was that the icelandic ambassador to the US was recalled. and ?red (1 :51 :02 bradassBT: thats iust one {1:51:14 info@gdrianlgmo.com: Anything unreleased? {1:51:25 bradassS7: i?d have to ask assanqe [1:51:53 bradassBT: i zero?lled the original [1:51:54 info?adrignlamocom: why do you answer to him? [1:52:29 i i iust want the material out i dont want to be a part of it [1:52:54 PM) info@adrlanlamo.com: i've been considering helping wikileaks with opsec [1:53:13 PM) bradassB'I: they have decent im obviously violating it [1:53:34 bradassBT: im a wreck (1:53:47 bradassBY: im a total fucking wreck right now (1:54:04 info@adrianlamo.corn: not really. 2600 is an ally of wikileaks. (1:54:10 info@adrianlamo.com: how old are you? Page 9 of 48 (1:54:15 PM) brada558?: 22 (1:54:55 PM) bradassB?: but im not a source for im talking to you as someone who needs moral and emotional fucking support (1:55:02 PM) bradassBT: (1:55:10 PM) info@aclrianlamo.com: i told you. none of this is for print (1:55:16 ok. ok (1 :55:19 info@adriantamo.com: i want to know who i?m supporting (1:55:25 info@adrianlamo.com: no names as yet {1:55:26 im flipping 1:55:32 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: security. (1:55:43 PM) bradassBT: huh? (1:55:51 info@adrianlamo.com: re. no names as yet. (1:55:56 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: except brad. i assume. (1:55:23 bradassBT: ive already sent you full name in (1:56:43 info@adrianlamo.com: oh! you?re the PGP guy (1:56:52 PM) bradass??i': yeah, im sorry (1:56:57 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i?m an idiot (1:57:33 PM) bradassa'I: im pretty reckless at this point (1:57:53 PM) bradassa'i': but im trying not to end up with 5.56mm rounds in my (1:53:38 PM) bradassBT: that i fired. (2:00:18 PM) bradass?T: im not lying when i say im totally out of it right now (2:01:02 PM) bradassB?: ok, im not suicidal quite (2:01:14 bradassBT: but im pretty desperate for some non?isolation (2:02:34 PM) bradas587: idk anymore (2:04:29 bradass?i': im a source. not quite a volunteer (2:05:38 bradass?7: i mean. im a hioh pro?le and We developed a relationship with but i dont know much more than what he tells me. which is very little (2:05:58 bradass??: it tool-t me four months to con?rm that the person i was communicating was in fact assanoe {2:10:01 info@adrianlarno.com: how?d you do that? (2:12:45 bradassS?: oathered more info when i questioned him whenever he was beinq tailed in Sweden by State Department iwas tryino to hours out who was following and and he was tellino me stories of other times he?s been and they matched up with the ones he's said publicly (2:14:23 info?zad?g?lamdcom: did that bear out? the surveillance? (2:14:46 based on the description he oave me, assessed it was the Northern Europe Diplomatic Security tryino to ?oure out how he set the Reykiavik (2:15:57 theualso oauoht wind that he had a of the Gharani airstrike in afohanistan. which he has, but hasn?t the production team was actually workino on the Baohdad strike though. which was never really (2:15:22 PM) bradassBT: he?s not the whole 15-6 for that so it wont iust be video with no context Page 10 of 48 (2:16:55 PM) but its not nearly as it was an awful incident. but nothing like the baghdad one {2:17:59 PM) bradassB?: the investigating of?cers left the material unprotectedLsittino in a directory on a centcomsmitmil (2:18:03 PM) bradassB7: server 2:18:56 PM bradassBT: but the did zi afaik it hasn?t been broken vet {2:19:12 PM) bradassB?: 14+ [2:13:37 bradassBT: i can?t believe what im telling you {2:19:50 PM) bradassBT: ive had too many chinks in my armor {2:20:52 PM) bradass87: im a broken soul {2:21:22 PM) bradassBT: i need to go eat. ill (2:21:26 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: *hug" {2:21:39 PM) bradassB?: thank you it means a lot (2:54:21 im sorry {2:54:21 info@adrianlamo.com I have more messages than resources atlocatable to action them. Please be very patient. (2:55:00 PM) bradassa'i': ugh (2:56:34 PM) bradassB'h my family is my boyfriend ditched me without telling im losing my losing my career i dont have much more except for this laptop. some books. and a hell of a story (2:57:25 PM) bradasst37: honestly, scared (2:52:32 bradassa?l': and i have no-one i trust (2:53:21 bradassB7: i need a lot of (2:58:48 PM) bradassBY: i dont know ifi can rebuild from (3:00:43 PM) info@adriantamo.com: you can always rebuild. (3:01:03 PM) bradassB7: yes. but i cant KEEP rebuilding all the damn im exhausted (3:01:26 PM) bradassB'l?: i didnt get into my boot with homelessness across the country in ?06 (3:01:45 PM) bradassBT: i drifted from oktahoma city. to tulsa. to chicago. and ?nally landed at my aunt's house in DC {3:02:29 bradassBT: im in desperation to get somewhere in i joined the and that's proven to be a disaster now (3:02:49 bradassB7: i've done a lot of random stuff. that no-one knows (3:03:09 PM) bradassS'i': its just such a disconnect between myself. and what i and what people see (3:04:57 PM) bradassa'l': and now i'm quite possibly on the verge of being the most notorious "hacktivist" or whatever you want to call its all a big mess i've im sorry. (3:05:51 im pouring my heart out to someone i've never met. and i dont exactly have a lot of proof of anything (3:05:59 PM) bradassBT: im shattered (3:06:4i' PM) bradassST: im so exhausted (3:07:10 PM) im a real [3:11:13 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: no apologies needed the ?les. aes?256 with an excellent so Page 11 of 48 (3:12:00 oracles.th ?gulp?: (3:12:34 PM) bradassa'i': i wish i could explain the pain (3:12:39 info@adrianlamo.com: are you on Facebook? (3:12:56 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: As an aside. are you concerned about prosecution? (3:13:02 PM) bradassBIh sort you cant ?nd me (3:13:15 PM) info@adrianlarno.com: Your MICE seems to be ideology. (3:14:32 info@adrianlamo.com: I can't ?nd a SPC in ZBCT 1DMTN 82? (3:15:14 PM) bradassBT: (3:15:39 info@adrianlamo.corn: Nope. (3:15:06 PM) login.? ?rstlast [3:16:45 PM) bradassa?: pass: [redacted] [no spaces] (3:17:06 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: wanna sponsor me for an AKO account? I used to have one (3:17:14 PM) bradassa?i': sure (3:17:32 PM) bradass?i': use mine. its not really of any use to me right now (3:1?:47 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: negatory (3:17:48 PM) bradassa'f: sorry "i (3:18:05 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: ijust wanted back (3:18:24 PM) bradassS?: ok (3:18:59 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: remember. ?nding stuff is what i do. and curiosity is my game. (3:19:09 PM) bradassBT: i know (3:19:23 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: including your personal ad from 3 years ago. (3:19:32 bradassBT: which one? (3:19:50 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i closed the window: it wasn't relevant (3:20:13 PM) bradassSi?: via bradassBT. .. i dont know how that one got set up. (3:20:14 info@adrianlamo.com: sadly. it lacked a photo (3:20:33 bradassB7: its from some kind of weird fetish (3:20:37 bradassBT: they wouldn't let me delete it (3:21 :07 bradass?'i': im pretty intenyebbies-wise (3:21:43 PM) bradassBT: is there a public facebook i can add you from? (3:22:59 PM) bradasst?': wow, didnt knowi had a xanga account (3:23:15 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: what do you mean re. facebook (3:24:06 PM) bradassa7: mine is not you must be a friend to see or a friend of a friend to even know it exists (3:24:23 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: facebookcomffelon (3:24:54 PM) bradassS'i': requested (3:25:41 god that pacman thing is starting to get annoying (3:25:14 PM) bradass?7: enjoyed it at ?rst. but now everytime i open a new browser whoo-whoo-whoo-whoo?whoo (3:26:53 PM) bradass?'l: let me make more info available to you (3:27:00 PM) bradassa?f: hold on, need change my privacy settings (3:23:10 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: you?re kinda cute. Page 12 of 48 (3:23:44 PM) bradassa?: refresh, you should be able to see check to see if you can see more photo albums (3:29:33 PM) bradassBi": snc3fh3024snc3i'11156 (3:29:46 PM) bradassB'i?: one of the few times you will ever see the inside of a SCIF (3:30:09 PM) bradassBT: the map in the background is classi?ed SECRETNREL TO USA, MCFI (3:31:11 PM) brad-35587: behind the cabinet) with the blue bucket on is the entrance to the SIGINT section (3:31 :42 PM) medals-58?: is where they process all the recorded phone data from towers in all of eastern baghdad (3:32:27 PM) bradassBY: interrogator chick on top right corner (3:33:04 PM) bradassB7: you can see me slowly descending spiritually in the wall posts (3:35:09 PM) bradassBT: i cant really seem to de?ne my ideology {3:36:07 PM) info@adrianiamo.com: You already have my most permissive privacy settings. (3:36:26 PM) bradassBTalbums? (3:38:39 PM) bradassB'i': we have two mutual friends. how interesting (3:40:08 PM) bradassST?: small world (3:41 :39 PM) bradassBT: asigh< (3:41:51 PM) bradassBT: Iauren your ?ex? (3:42:15 PM) bradassa'i': tyler watkins would be fucking ditched me (3:42:30 PM) bradassBT: im still utterly flabberghasted (3:43:13 PM) i dont i cant seem to hold a We got so much baggage (3:45:04 PM) bradassSi': im all mixed up (3:46:14 PM) bradassa'i': lost a in a short period of time (3:48:20 PM) bradassST: im a mess. huh (3:49:41 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i?m familiar with loss (3:49:52 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: lauren?s in AZ (3:50:36 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: was that a yay or nay on the AKO sponsorship. or does your acc?t have that ability? Page 13 of 48 {3:51:31 bradassBT: cant seem to do it without con?rmation of spouse seems to be no way around also. you?d be booted out by the time i get discharged (3:55:06 i dont know how im going to break the news to (3:56:16 bradassBT: how would you rate the ethics of my situation? (4:03:06 PM) bradassBT: ugh. im a mess (4:07:14 PM) bradassBT: what ideology do i seem to be foliowing? (4:16:26 PM) bradassBT: :sigh: (4:16:34 bradassBT: *sigh* (4:28:34 PM) bradassB7: i'll work on the ako its getting awfully need sleep (4:54:44 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: sorry i'm just swamped today. i?ll be more talkative in the future. (4:55:16 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: keep your chin up. for me. *re?hug? (7:18:03 AM) bradass??: The message received from bradasstit'rr is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (7:19:05 AM) Unveri?ed conversation with bradass87 started. 0:19:12 infot?iadrianlamocom: hey you (7:19:19 info@adrianlamo.com: resend? [7:19:19 bradassa'r': whats up? [7:19:49 said hello (7:19:46 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: waking up. got up about an hour ago. 0615. l?:20:10 brgdass?'r': heh. the evening is still young here info@adrianlamo.com: how?re you feeling today? (320:3? modest-18?: im feeling a little better.._ [7:20:52 AM) bradassBmind. keeping to myself (7:22:18 info@adrianlamo.com: an?hirtg new a. exciting? [7:24:21 hradass?h no. was outside in the sun all 110 degrees F. doing various details for a visitirMand and some college team?s (7:24:43 info@adriantamo.com: cheerleaders. (7:24:46 ran a but no-one showed threw a lot of food away 7:25:20 AM as football visitin on off a art of Morale Welfare and Recreation projects (7:25:39 info@adriantamo.com: *sigh* (7:26:01 bradassai?: >shrug< [7:26:37 brgdassa7: im and smell like charcoal. sweat. and thats about all thats new (7:26:47 infot?zadrianlamocom: Is there a Baghdad 2600 meeting? :5 {7:28:04 bradgss?h there?s only one other person im aware of that actually knows anything about computer he?s a analyst. of course (7:28:41 is he the other one who pokes around he network? (7:29:26 AM) afaik. he doesn't play around with classi?ed but im sure he's cagable Page 14 of 48 (7:30:09 AM) infoQadria?mosom: then it stands to reason that vou have at least 3 people who have some intosec knowledge (3:31:15 bradassa'i?: im not quite sure what vou?re saving (7:31:23 AM) bradassa7: infosec knowledge of what? (7:31:29 baggeth the networks? (7:32:13 precise-587: i know a lot of computer securitv people (7:33:44 info?ladrianlammcom: i mean. in a wav that would lend itself to a meeting. (7:33:33 info?adrianlamo.com: i'm writincLa message trvino to tie meetings together globallv with a sampling of onlL-vBGOOpeopte to work with and get to go out and evangelize. so i have it on the brain 7:33:50 AM bradassa7: know how to. but dont [7:34:33 AMJ bradassBT: vou don?t want these people having a meeting (7:34:48 bradass?: i guess vou do (7:35:37 AM) bradass?7: other person knows a lot about how to tap cellular phones (its his job. after all) (7:35:56 bradassBY: PROPHET team (7:36:22 AM) bradassB7: (7:36:47 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Can they do CDMA or GSM over-the~air vs. at the switch? (7:37:07 AM) bradass?i?: both (7:37:16 bradassBT: v3 as well (7:37:48 AM) bradassBT: over?the-air and at switches and (7:38:05 AM) bradassa7: redundancy for locational re?nement (7:38:14 info@adrianlamo.com: I assume the same could be done in the US. {7:38:37 bradassB7: of course (7:39:14 info@adrianlamo.com: Too bad Philip Agee died. You and he would have fun conversations. (7:39:43 bradassB'i': well. im not an expert in irn Just familiar (7:40:06 AM) info@adrianiamo.com: Neither was he. He just didn?t like what he saw in the course of his work. (7:40:11 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: And wrote about it. (7:40:43 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: "Inside the Company? - followed by ?On the Run", predictably. (7:40:56 AM) bradassa7: i know that approximately 85?90% of global transmissions are sifted through by but vast majority is noise. .. so its getting harder and harder for them to track anything (7:41:31 AM) bradassBT: its like ?nding a needle in a (7:42:11 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Especially the way I speak Spanish. Rapid?re. few pauses between words :p (7:43:11 AM) bradassB7: heh (7:43:41 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Colombians in Colombia think all Americans are CIA. it?s kind of funny. Page 15 of 48 (7:44:01 AM) breasts-587: but once a single piece of information is then the databases can be sifted and sifted and sifted some more. for re?nement, so other intelligence functions can get in the act (7:44:09 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Fortunately, there are plenty of Colombians with my skin tone. (7:44:20 AM) bradassB7: >nod< (7:45:52 AM) bradassa7: im not all that paranoid about NBA i SIGINT you just have to be OPSEC savvy. and you're all good (7:45:27 AM) bradassB7: and FISA actually does come in very handy (7:46:46 AM) bradassBT: though. its frequently overlooked (7:47:36 AM) bradass87: they?ll collect signal information. to refine other intel sources and try to collect (7:47:57 AM) bradassB7: erasing the signal data (7:48:11 AM) bradassB7: since its not legally "evidence" (7:49:38 AM) bractassl37: and yes. illegal wiretaps are used in coordination between NSA and FBI .. though its not seen as illegal, because often the data is only used to give leads (7:49:42 bradassB7: and not evidence (7:50:49 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: *nod" (7:50:52 AM) bradassa7: one of the reasons assange uses his rubberhose plausibly deniable whole-disk setup (7:51:46 AM) bradassST: i can see both sides of the whole illegal wiretap debate (7:52:17 AM) bradass37: it IS awfully useful in catching bad but innocent privacy IS (7:52:37 AM) bradassBT: but everyone does it (7:53:08 AM) bradassB7: its an thats my honest opinion (7:53:31 AM) bradas587: so. i as much as i can (7:54:31 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: how much can be trusted? (7:54:38 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: say. is PGP secure? (7:55:13 AM) bradass87: depends on the depends on how safe you keep your private keys (7:55:25 AM) bradassBT: DES Triple you're doomed in minutes (7:55:45 AM) AES take brute force (7:56:06 AM) bradassBT: days to weeks to break (7:56:24 AM) bradassai': its about securing the keys. using complex enough (7:56:42 AM) bradassB7: and sticking to Rijndael variants (7:57:15 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Does keylength matter past 2048? (7:57:28 AM) bradassB7: it can (7:53:06 AM) RSA 1024 takes a few university of michigan finally broke it with a partial (7:59:00 AM) bradassBT: never heard of it being broken NSA can feasibly do it. if they want to allocate national level ?number-crunching" time to do (7:59:56 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: What about (8:00:33 AM) bradassa7: OTR is but change ?ngerprints every few weeks Page 16 of 48 {8:00:59 AM) bradass?i': its not frequently used by its not a priority to find a crack (8:01 :25 AM) bradassST: the whole pidgin adium learning curve has its advantage {8:01 :30 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Does Assanoe use AIM or other messaoind services? id like to chat with him one of these davs about opsec. Mv onlv credentials beyond intrusion are that the FBI never dot mv data or found mekbefore my negotiated surrender. but that?s somethinq. {8:01:53 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: And my data was never recovered. {8:02:07 AM) brawl?ass?z no he does not use AIM (3:02:37 info@adrianlamo.com: How would I get ahold of him? (3:433:59 bradassw: he would come to m! {8:03:25 AM) infof?ladrianlamocom: I've never failed to set ahold of someone. (8:03:29 bradass?7: he does use OTR but discusses nothino OPSEC (8:03:42 I cornered Ashcroft IRL. in the end. (8:04:19 bradassBT: he *mioht? use the cocde iabber but vou didn?t hear that from 1133 (8:04:33 dotcha (8:06:00 bradassB7: im going to grab some dinner. info@adrianlamo.com: 130826&id=704990 (8:06:47 tnfo?adrianlamo.com: ididn?t pass securitv, either. or rather. i did [8:06:52 info?gdrianiamo.corn: eniov dinner. (8:05:55 info@adriantamo.com: twvs. (9:12:38 bk (9:12:38 info@adrianlamo.com have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. (9:22:54 bradassBT: marine ilieoal. but certainlv easv (9:24:11 bradassa'I: ashcroft? (9:24:24 bradassST: oh. (9:24:29 bradassBT: >vawn< (9:26:52 AMLbradassSi': im realiv not familiar at all with FBI stuff (9_:27:04 AM) americans have so manv more riohts than non-americans (9:31:42 bradassa7: its awful (9:46:11 info?adrianlamocom: Ashcroft's DOJ tried to use the USA PATRIOT Acton me. (10:05:24 info?adrianlamo.com: around? {10:12:34 bradassB7: veah {10:12:57 info@adrianlamo.com: are vou baptist bv anv chance? (10:13:34 bradassa'l: raised never believed a word of it (30:13:59 bradassa'l: im i duess i follow humanist values thouoh (10:14:15 bradass?i': have custom dodtaos that sav "Humanist" (10:15:19 AM) bradassB7: always been too intellectual. if notjust plain queer. for religion (10:15:48 bradassB'I: why? (10:17:15 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: regional religions in the US. incorrect hunch (10:17:34 bradassBT: i suffered out there (10:17:56 brad?55372 i was the on? non-religious person in town Page 17 of 48 (10:18:17 orator?1558?: more_pews than (10:13:37 bradassB7: i understand them thouoh mm 8:53 im not mean to they *reallv* don?t know [10:19:39 brad-35387: i ooliteiv but thev are the ones who qet uncomfortable when i make. verv politely. good leading ?0:20:48 (bv leadinq points. i mean ask multiple questions, with obvious answers. then ask a question based on the answers from the previous questions that challenges their normal response to the same question) (10:21:26 bf?d35537: [excellent example of this: 10:28:21 AaassBT: new orker is runnino 10k word article on More on 30 may, [10:23:21 info@adrianlamo.com have more messaoes than resources allocatable to action them. Please be verv patient. mz33:07 info@adrianlamo.com: one moment fone (10:33:30 boa?dassB'r?: {trackino device} (10:37:28 AM) bradassBT: trust level increasino?? louantifv] (10:58:30 AM) bradassBT: snc3lh5005snc3r1 {10:58:30 AM) info@adrianlamo.com I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. bradassB?: :whistle: (11:09:27 AM) info@adrianlamo.com have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. (11:16:39 bradassat': here's an awkward i look so short Page 18 of 48 (11:17:45 AM) info@adrianlarno.com: was on the phone. may have a gig copy-editing. (11:21:34 info@adrianlamo.com: ironic, huh? (11:21:55 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: well, not ironic (11:21:57? AM) info@adrianlamo.com: just funny (11:22:14 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: all the things i could do. buti copy-edit (11:28:33 AM) Iol (11:28:38 bradassS?: not much different from my (previous?) job (11:28:42 AM) bradassa'I: take slides from subordinate battalions, change wording improve spelling. replace battalion symbols with brigade symbols. disseminate throughout brigade and forward to division (11:29:12 bradassBT: leaves a computer savvy guy a lot of time to pry around (11:31:13 AM) bradassa'f: i dont know what im going to do (11:31:13 AM) bradassBT: well. obviously (11:31:17? AM) bradassBY: i guess i could start electrolysis as soon im back in the even before im outprocessed (11:36:12 bradassBT: still gonna be weird watching the world change on the macro scale: while my life changes on the micro (11:36:12 AM) info@adrianlamo.com I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. (11:35:12 AM) never been good at the micro (12:12:01 PM) bradassB7: fucking satellite internet (12:12:01 PM) info@adrianlamo.com I have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. (12:13:25 PM) bradassBT: light dust might go in and out of Cx (12:33:53 PM) bradassBT: still there? (12:33:53 PM) info@adrianlamo.com have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. (12:38:30 PM) bradassST: ping (1 :08:40 PM) bradass??: ping (1 :24:21 bradassBT: did you know it took NBA 6 months. and 50 people to ?gure out how to tap the iPhone Page 19 of 48 (1:24:21 info@adrianiamo.com i have more messages than resources allocatable to action them. Please be very patient. {1:26:16 bradassBT: they honestly didn?t know what was going on, because of the sudden format switch when made the contract (1:26:32 PM) bradassa?I: (1:2?:42 PM) bradassBT: [not 100% if thats true. but i?ve heard enough variations by NSA types to betieve it] (1:27:46 PM) bradass?'i': *sure [1:35:13 bradassBT: ping (1 :40:41 PM) bradassB7: ping (1 :41:29 PM) bradassBT: [sorry. have a lot on my i like talking] (1:55:28 PM) sleep [you can reply. ill check in morning] (12:24:04 PM) bradassa?: hello again (12:24:04 PM) info@adrianlamo.com I?m not here right now (12:24:15 bradassBT has not been authenticated yet. You should authenticate this buddy. (12:24:15 Unveri?ed conversation with bradassS? started. (12:24:58 PM) bradassa7: hello again [12:26:54 PM) tirade-15587: The New York Times Published. January 201 1919 OPEN DEPLOMACY. ?Open diplomacy" does not mean that every word said in preparing a treaty should be shouted to the whole world and submitted to all the mis- constructions that malevolence. folly. and evil ingenuity could put upon it. Open diplomacy is the opposite of se- cret diplomacy, which consisted in the underhand negotiation of treaties whose very existence was kept from the world. It consisted also in the modi?cation of openly negotiated treaties by secret treaties by some of the Powers behind the backs of the others. it is against this kind of double dealing and secret dealing, the mother of wars. that the world protested. It has demanded the sub- stitution of open diplomacy for secret diplomacy. But open diplomacy does Page 20 of 4B not turn a peace conference into a debating society. It would be reasonable for the newspaper correspondents at Ver- sailles to expect that the delicate work of reconciling divergent points of view on so tender a subject as national in? terests should be wholly conducted in their presence. The conferees, by rev serving the right of holding executive sessions while they admit the corre- spondents to open sessions, have gone as far as the needs of the public de- manned. The world has intrusted the Peace Conference with the work of preparing the treaty, it wishes to know what is done. and why it is done: but the sensible part of it, at any rate, has no desire to have spread before it all the heart~to-heart talks and turns of phrase of men perform- ing the gigantic task of reconciling national differences and coming to agreement. It wishes to give malice and anti-Ally propaganda as little as possible to distort and warp. lt knows from four years? experience what in?nite possibilities are in that line. Copyright The New York Times (01:58:40 PM) bradassB?: hi (02:00:30 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: hey (02:00:37 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: just woke up from a nap (02:00:42 PM) bradassBT: (02:00:58 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: feel hung over, without any alcohol to blame for it {02:01:10 PM) info@adrianlarno.com: how's stuff? (02:01:14 PM) bradassSY: haven?t had any alcohol since September (02:01:24 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i don't usually drink [02:01:23 PM) bradassBT: nor do i {02:01:52 PM) bradassB'I?: but i had a few drinks in September, since i knew i wasn't going to have any for awhile Page 21 of 43 (02:02:05 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: good enough reason. (02:02:12 PM) bradassaifz uhm. i was reduced in rank today (02:03:23 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: to what? (02:03:27 PM) bradassBT: received a ?Company Grade Article 15" a formality (they only reduced me in grade, and aren?t making me do "extra duty?) since they needed to punish me in some way (02:03:36 PM) bradassB?: PFC (02:04:59 PM) bradass87: i punched a colleague in the face during an (something i NEVER DO. . . its whats sparked this whole saga (02:06:24 PM) info@adrianlarno.com: did they have it oming? (02:06:33 PM) brada558?: yes (02:06:44 PM) bradassBT: as a result, i was referred (forced) to behavioral to evaluate as a result. my commander had access to all of my mental health ergo how they found out about my cross-dressing history. discomfort with my role in society. and the environment We placed myself in (02:07:03 PM) bradassa7?2 it was a minor but it brought attention to me (02:02:46 PM) bradassa'l': the person kind of deserved but kind of it wasn't worth this mass at all (02:08:14 PM) bradassBT: (had a lot of high ?ves and "Go Mannings!") (02:08:31 PM) bradassB?: not proud of it at all (02:03:38 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: These things happen. (02:00:41 PM) bradass87: and very surprised (02:08:52 PM) brada5587: im not a violent person (02:09:05 PM) bradass87: (odd to hear from someone in the Army?) (02:09:13 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: neither am i. but i?ll be violent ifi have to. (02:09:58 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: most people in the Army aren?t in specialties that involve directly servicing targets. (02:10:14 PM) bradassBT: im glad you realize that (02:10:22 PM) bradassB7: (forgot you dated a Cl guy) (02:11:10 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: make it my business to know as much as I can about relevant topics. (02:1 1 :43 PM) bradassa'l': indeed. a heavy curiosity (02:11:51 bradassBT: ?nd much more about me? (02:12:13 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Only by talking to you 2) (02:12:27 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: it'd be rude to deep search you. (02:12:45 PM) bradassBT: its something im used to (02:12:58 PM) bradassBT: i barely (02:13:07 PM) bradassBT: because i anticipate interest (02:13:15 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: words and actions say more than records on paper (02:13:29 PM) bradassB?I: >nod< know this all too well (02:13:54 PM) bradassa'f: gathering as many documents as possible re: my career (02:14:12 PM) bradassS?: trying to control the narrative (02:14:50 PM) bradas587: From an award recommendation (never completed}: Manning's persistence led to the disruption of ?Former Special Groups" in the New Baghdad area. SPC Page 22 of 43 Manning's tracking of targets led to the identi?cation of previously unknown enemy support zones. His analysis led to heavy targeting of insurgent leaders in the area that consistently disrupted their operations. SPC Manning?s dedication led to the detainment of Malik Fadil aI-Ugayli. a Tier 2 level target within the Commando Recommended awards for assisting in the disruption of Former Special Groups (FSG) in Southeastern Baghdad. identifying and disrupting operations from previously unknown enemy support zones in Hayy Zafaraniyah. and assisting in the detainment of Malik Fadil al-Ugayli. a Tier 2 level target. (02:15:41? bradassai': Malik was a heavy cell phone user (02:17:42 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: I gave mine to a friend to make one call a mile away and then went dark. (02:17z4? PM) info@adrianlamo.com: During my hunt. [02:1?:57 PM) bradasst37: smart move (02:19:54 PM) bradassBT: my speciality is (was) tracking a Shi'a group called Khatiai'o Hizbollah,.. they were OPSEC savvy as all didn't even know the group existed until Iranian backed they make al-Qaeda knock offs look like (02:20:13? PM) bradassS?: they?re the most dangerous guys in the (02:20:28 PM) that is (02:21 :10 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Only because they are savvy in helping their communities and building goodwill. {02:21 :39 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: otherwise they're just light infantry. (02:21 :52 bradassa7: they also specialize in the construction of EFPs (02:22:02 bradass?i?: so good, we cant trace anything (02:22:11 PM) not a sensor, not a cell nothing but a crater (02:22:35 PM) bradassBT: they're ghosts {02:22:54 info@adrianlamo.com: They taught Israel a few memorable lessons. {02:23:16 bradassB7: they stopped targeting us. thank (02:23:35 PM) bradassBT: they?ve moved into the political phase of their operations (02:23:51 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Fucks are our allies and still spy on us as much as they please. And it?s kosher: cos it's part of the game. (02:23:58 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Israel. that is. (02:24:23 PM) bradassa'i': well. we?ve got plenty of assets watching them all NF stuff of course (02:24:51 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: that's different. we're the Godd Guys (TM) (02:24:56 PM) info@adrianlarno.com: *good (02:26:01 bradassBT: i dont believe in good guys versus bad guys i only a plethora of states acting in self with varying ethics and moral standards of course. but self-interest nonetheless [02:26:18 bradass?'f: slonlyl'onlv see! {02:26:47 info@gdrianlgmo.com: the tm meant i was being facetious (02:26:59 bradassST: gotchya Page 23 ode l02:2?:47 bradassBY: i mean. we're better in some we're much more use a lot more words and qual techniques to leoitimize evemthinq [02:28:00 PM) brada5587: its better than disappearinq in the middle of the niqht [02:28:19 PM) bradassBY: but iust because somethind is more subtlegoesn?t make it riqht [02:29:04 hradassBT: i quess im too idealistic {02:31:02 PM) bradass?T: i think the thinq that qot me the that made me rethink the world more than an?hing {02:35:46 bradassB'I: was watchinq 15 detainees taken bv the Iraqi Federal for p_rinting_ "anti?Iraqi literature?. .. the iraqi federal police wouldn?t cooperate with US forces, so iwas instructed to investiqate the matter. ?nd out who the "bad quvs? were, and how signi?cant this was for the it turned out. thev had printed a scholarlv critique aqainst PM i had an interpreter read it for and when i found out that it was a beniqn political critique titled ?Where did the monev do?" and followinq the corruption trail within the PM's i immediately took that information and *ran" to the of?cer to explain what was he didn't want to hear anv of he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in ?ndinq (02:35:46 info@adrianlamo.com I'm not here rioht now (02:36:2? PM) brada558?: evervthinq started slippinq after i saw things differenth {02:37:37 PM) bradass?i': i had alwavs questioned the thinqs worked. and investiqated to find the but that was a point where i was a *part* of i was activelv involved in somethinq that i was completelv aqainst. .. [Ewen info?adrianlamocom: That could happen in Colombia. [02:38:21 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Different cultures. dude. m:38:28 info@adrianlamo.com: Life is cheaper. {02:38:34 oh im quite aware (02:38:45 PM) infofc'ggdrianlamocom: What would vou do if vour rote iw Wikileaks seemed in danger of beinq blown? (02:33:48 bradassB7: but i was a part of and completer (02:39:01 sometimes we?re all helpless (02:39:34 PM) bradassB'F: and fiqure out how i could qet mv side of the storv befOre evervthinp was twisted around to make me look like Nidal Hassan 13:40:15 PM) bradassBT: i dont think its going to happen [02:40:26 PM) bradassa7: i mean, i was never noticed [02:41:10 PM) bradassB?: reqular_lv except when i had somethinq then it was back to "brinq me coffee. then sweep the floor" (M24 bradas_s87: i never quite understood that (02:42:44 bradassat': felt like i was an abused work m2:43:33 bradassah also. theres qod awful accountabilitv of IP 02:44:47 the network was upqraded. and patched up so many and svstems would do down. loos would be and when moved or hard drives were zeroed (02:45:12 bradassB'i?: its impossible to trace much on these ?eld [02:46:10 PM) and who would honestlv expect so much information to be ex?ltrated from a ?eld network? Page 24 of 48 (02:46:25 info?adrianlamo.comt I'd be one paranoid boy in vour shoes. t02:4?:07 the CM video came from a server in our domain! and not a sinole person no?ced 10_2:4r:g1 info?adrianlamocom1 PM) bradass?T: Apache Weapons Team video of 12 JUL 07 airstrike on Reuters some sketchy but fairly normal and civilians {02:48:52 info?tadrianlamocom: How lono between the leak and the publication? 102:49z?l? bradassa'i': some time in februarv {02:49:25 bradassBT: it was uploaded {02:50:04 info?adrianlamocom: uploaded where? how would I transmit somethinq ifl had similarly damning data {02:51:49 bradassST: preferava openssl the file with see-255. .. then use at prearranged drop to addresses 10215208 bradaSSB7: keepino the and uploadino via a different means (02:52:31 info?adrianlamocom: so i myself would be SOL wro a way to prearranqe [02:54:33 bradassB'r': not the submission should suf?ce thouoh i'd use tor on top of {02:54:43 PM) bradasstiT: but you're data is ooino to be watched [02:54:44 bradassBT: *your (02:54:49 bradassBT: by someone. more than liker (02:54:53 PM) info@adrianiamo.com: submission where? 102:55:07 PM) bradassB'?: w .oro submission system (02:55:23 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: in the massive queue? (02:55:54 PM) bradassBT: lol. yeah. it IS pretty [02:55:56 PM) bradassB?: buried (02:56:04 PM) bradassa'i?: i see what you mean [02:56:35 PM) bradassBT: lonq term sources do oet i can see where the "unfairness" factor comes in {02:56:53 info@adrianlamo.com: how does that preference work? {02:57:47 bradassBY: the material is easy to {02:58:27 because they know a bit more about the source than a pureiy anon mous one (02:59:04 bradassBi': and con?rmation publicly from earlier material. would make them more likeiv to i [02:59:16 PM) bradassBY: im not savino they but i can see how that might develop [03:00:18 PM) bradassST: if two of the laroest public relations "coups" have come from a single for instance {03:02:03 bra?iss?i': purer 'submittinq' material is more liker to oet overlooked without contacting them by other means and saving hey. check your submissions for {03:02:03 info@adrianiamo.com I'm not here right now {03:02:19 bradassB?: sfyoufso (03:03:38 PM) bradassB?: iono. im not so ive seen the way the system works. and the way the pubiic reacts, and the way the PR people ive never felt threatened Page 25 of 48 (03:06:10 PM) bradassBT: i dont know whats wrong with (03:07:01 PM) bradassBT: i couldnt let these thinos stay inside of the and inside of my (03:07:26 PM) brew?35587: i recognized the value of some (03:07:33 bradass?7: knew what they duq deeper (03:07:53 P1911 bradassB7: i watched that video cold. for instance (03:10:32 at ?rst it was iust a bunch of guys getting shot up by a no bio about two dozen more where that came from but something struck me as odd with the van and also the fact it was being stored in a JAG of?cer's so i looked into eventually tracked down the date; and then the exact GPS and i was ok. so thats what then i went to the regglar and it was still on my so i typed into the date. and the and then i see this (03:11:07 bradassB7: i kept that in my mind for probably a month and a before i forwarded it to them (03:11:54 bradassa'I: then there was the Finkel book (03:12:16 PM) bradassBT: im almost certain he had a copy (03:12:16 PM) info@adrianlamo.com I?m not here right now (03:13:31 PM) bradassa7: it was i mean. i've identi?ed bodies its rare to do so. but usually its iust some nobody (03:13:48 PM) it humanized the whote re-sensitized me (03:15:38 i dont im just. weird i guess (03:15:49 i cant separate myself from others (03:16:12 PM) ifeel connected to like they were distant family (03:16:24 PM) bradassB'l': care? (03:17:27 PM) sums it up for me (03:18:17 bradassB7: i probably shouldn?t have read sagan, feynman. and so many intellectual authors last (03:21:11 PM) bradass?'f: >sigh< (03:22:14 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i get that (03:22:45 bradassa7: get that connection? (03:23:38 info@adriantamo.com: yeah. (03:24:08 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: which is why i?m sad for the people i sometimes have to hurt. (03:24:10 PM) we?re and were killing and no?one seems to see and it bothers me (03:24:26 bradass87: apathy (03:25:28 bradass87: apathy is far worse than the active participation (03:26:23 PM) brada5587: >hug< (03:29:31 PM) brada5587: http:iivimeo.coml5081720 Elie Wiesel summed it up pretty well for me- though his story is much much more important that mine (03:29:48 bradassB7: *than (03:31:33 PM) bradassBT: I prefer a painful truth over any blissful fantasy. Page 26 M48 (03:31:48 PM) bradassBT: slatthe (03:32:05 PM) info@adrianlarno.ccm: *hugback? (03:34:16 PM) bradassa?i': (03:35:44 PM) brada5587: i think ive been traumatized too much by reality. to care about consequences of shattering the fantasy (03:36:18 bradass8?: im not brave, im weak (03:39:00 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: sometimes they're the same thing (03:40:33 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: (03:40:43 bradass?i?: (03:52:34 bradass?'i': like i think ive said im not so much scared of getting caught and facing consequences at this as i am of bei_ng misunderstood. and never having the chance to live the life i wanted (03:52:34 PM) info@adrianlamo.com l'm not here right now (03:53:38 PM) bradassBY: im way way way too easy to (03:55:52 PM) bradassa'i': i dont like this person that people no-cne knows who i am inside (04:24:21 info@adrianlamo.com: are you in the green zone? *random* (04:26:02 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i know all about having a persona vs. a real person (04:26:06 info@adriantamc.com: <3 (04:28:46 yt? (06:19:10 PM) bradassB? has signed off. (01:3?:03 bra-dassfl??r has signed on. (01:37:51 AM) bradassBT: no im at FOB hammer (re: green zone}; persona is killing the fuck out of me at this (01:3?:51 AM) info@adrianlamo.com I'm not here right now (01:37:55 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01 :3?:55 We received an unreadable message from brada5587. (01:37:58 AM) [resent] im at FOB hammer (re: green zone): persons is killing the fuck out of me at this (01 :38:07 AM) bradassB? has ended hisiher private conversation with you: you should do the same. (01 :38:18 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:38:20 The message received from bradassB? is unreadable, as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:38:30 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:38:33 The message received from bradassai? is unreadable, as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:38:43 Error setting up private conversation; Malformed message received (01:38:46 The message received from bradassB? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:38:57 Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:38:59 AM) The message received from bradassBT is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:39:10 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received Page 2? of 48 (01:39:13 AM) The message received from bradassB?? is Unreadable, as you are not currently communicating privately. {01:39:22 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:39:25 AM) The message received from bradassB? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. [01:39:36 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received {01:39:39 AM) The message received from bradassB7 is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:39:49 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:39:52 AM) The message received from bradassB? is unreadable, as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:40:02 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:40:04 AM) The message received from bradassB? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:40:15 Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:40:18 AM) The message received from bradassBT is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:40:30 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malforrned message received [01:40:31 AM) The message received from bradassB? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:40:41 AM) Error setting up private cenversation: Malformed message received (01:40:45 AM) The message received from bradassS? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:40:54 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:40:57 AM) The message received from bradassB? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. [01:41:08 AM) Error setting up private conversation: lv'lalfonned message received (01 :41 :10 AM) The message received from bradassa? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. [01:41:21 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:41:23 AM) The message received from is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. (01:41:37 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:41:50 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received (01:41:52 AM) The message received from bradassB? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. {01:42:03 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received {01:42:05 AM) The message received from bradassB? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. {01:42:19 AM) Error setting up private conversation: Malformed message received AM) The message received from bradassBi? is unreadable. as you are not currently communicating privately. [01:45:20 AM) Unveri?ed conversation with bradassB? started. Page 28 of 48 (01:45:20 AM) bradassBT: [resent] otrfritzing (01:45:40 AM) bradassB? has ended hisfher private conversation with you; you should do the same. (01 :45:46 AM) The following message received from bradassB?? was not [ctr is bugging out] (01:45:54 AM) Unveri?ed conversation with bradassB? started. (01:46:02 AM) bradassB7: no im at FOB hammer (re: green zone): persona is Killing the fuck out of me at this (01 :48:15 AM) bradassBT: [phew. seems to be working now] (01:47:36 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: (01:48:50 AM) bradass87: Manning's persistence led to the disruption of "Former Special Groups? in the New Baghdad area. SPC Manning's tracking of targets led to the identification of previously unknown enemy support zones. His anatysis led to heavy targeting of insurgent leaders in the area that consistently disrupted their operations. SPC Manning?s dedication led to the detainment of Malik Fadil al-Ugayli. a Tier 2 level target within the Commando (01:49:17 AM) hradassBT: oh sent you that last night. nevermind (01:49:59 AM) bradassB7: im hoping i can get a decent job through connections (01:50:48 info@adrianlamo.com: what kind of work? (01:50:59 AM) bradassBT: >shrug< (01:51:11 AM) bradass?i': i'm good at so much (01:51:34 AM) bradass?7: proving it is the ergo contacts (01 :51:36 AM) bradassB7: im such a ghost (01:53:36 AM) bradas587: graphics design, web development. intelligence analysis. mathematics. economics. and both domestic and international politics (01:53:43 AM) bradassBT: dont really have a specialty; can roam (01 :54:47 AM) bradassB7: if it involves thought. rather than menial i can probably do it (02:06:07 AM) bradassa7: im an east so i'll probably roam up and down from Boston to DC for building connections (02:07:34 AM) bradassBT: im writing my resume already (02:10:58 AM) bradass?7: i need to buiid a portfolio (02:11:17 AM) bradassa7: so i might freetance for a few weeks (02:19:39 AM) bradassBT: assange offered me a position at wl. .. but im not interested right too much excess baggage (02:20:19 AM) bradassB7: its also a shoe-string cant make much of living doing that (02:31:38 AM) bradassBT: i dont know what to call myself (05:15:39 AM) bradassBT has signed off. (07:21:07 AM) bradassB7 has signed on. (07:31:09 AM) bradassB7: hello (07:33:22 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: hey (07:33:56 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: teil him i?ll do opsec for ?em {07:34:03 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: is he gay? (07:34:11 AM) into@adrianiarno.com: *random" (07:34:18 AM) bradassS7: are you talking to the right person? (07:34:23 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: yeah Page 29 of 48 (0?:34:36 AM) white haired crazy dude? (0?:34:38 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: continuing conyo where it dropped (0?:34:43 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: yeah AM) no.. (07:34:52 AM) bradassB'I: yery str8 (0?:35:47 AM) bradassBT: had a camera smuggled yia rectum he commented that he?s "de?niter not gay" (07:37:44 AM) Wadi-1558?: [lang story] (03:01:09 AM) bradassEtT has become idle. (08:05:33 AM) bradassS? has signed off. (10:29:02 AM) bradassa'i? has signed on. (10:29:02 AM) bradassB? is no longer idle. Breanna Manning gonna-haw-r- 4 I: .m w. i The (Witter account of a "Breanne til-anoint in DC. (10:33:53 AM) im already starting to give "Breanne" a digital twitten youtube accounts set up in her name (10:35:02 AM) bradassa'f: domain and server set up some time this going to design and build an entire content management system from scratch (10:35:43 AM) bradassB?: literally going backwards four years to start (10:56:28 AM) bradassBY: this is such a (11:02:24 AM) i need a lot more than a hug (11:03:05 AM) bradassa7own, i but people are gonna see my true colors either way (05:35:45 PM) bradassa? has signed on. (05:46:39 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: hey (05:47:10 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: how?s stuff? (01:20:55 AM) bradassBT has signed on. (01:2?:30 AM) bradassSI': im alive (01:27:40 AM) bradass?'l: and breathing (01:28:10 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: good to hear (01:28:27? info@adrianlamo.com: SITREP (01:35:50 AM) bradassBT: 1 PAX up (01:35:23 AM) bradassa'l: i had an hour session with my therapist (01:35:40 AM) brada5587: i didnt say word for like 30 minutes Page 30 of 48 (01:36:47 AM) ijust sat there. and he took notes (01:37:18 AM) hradassa'r': im an awkward patient (01:38:13 AM) bradassBT: its dif?cult to communicate with therapists (01:38:27 AM) bradassBT: i try to explain something and they twist it around (01:39:04 AM) bradassB?: and then they ask why i dont want to say anything (01:39:43 AM) bradassBT: one of my friends is in the Democratic Primary for a South Dakota Senate Angie we played Guitar Hero together (01:40:15 AM) bradassB7: very very gay (01:41:22 AM) bradassB7: State Senate that [not federal] (01:42:05 AM) bradassBT: (01:42:36 AM) info@adrianlarno.com: I gathered (01:43:53 AM) bradassBT: same circle of friends as he's cute. but he's a so we didn't work out [redacted] (01:44:40 AM) bradassBY: slept with him a few times, but sex was (01:44:50 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: howso? (01 :45:04 AM) bradassa7: two (01:45:40 AM) bradassBT: so. we?re friends (01:46:43 AM) bradassai?: though. its been a and political friends can forget you exist in three news cycles (01:4?:19 AM) bradassa'i': kind of reinforces my cyniciSm (01:4?:55 AM) bradass?'i': i still have a little spark of a dream call me (01 :48:30 AM) bradassB?: but. i'd like to insert myself into politics) as a technical person with real ideas?. (01 :49:28 AM) bradassB7: too many words in political too short of an attention too short of goals (01:50:38 AM) bradassBT: humanity can accomplish so but its like herding cats (01:50:57 AM) bradassa'f: getting the smart people with ideas to cooperate. that is (01:51 :55 AM) bradassB?: im probany suffering from depression (01:51:59 AM) bradass87: (01:52:03 AM) bradassS?: (01:52:06 AM) brada338?: (01:52:15 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Who isn?t [01:52:20 AM) bradass$?: goddamn. i missed the key twice (01:52:27? AM) info@adrianlamo.com: l'm supposedly bipolar. (01:52:38 AM) bradassBT: oh well. still not medicated (01:53:00 AM) bradassBT: i dont believe a third of the (01:53:53 AM) bradassBT: so many Disorders that so many people fall it just seems like a method to categorize a person. medicate them, and make money from prescription medications (01:54:04 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: (01:54:31 AM) bradassa'l: i?d like to meet a single person that wouldn't fall into a Disorder in the DSM-IV-TR (01:55:31 AM) bradassBT: [I'm random. too] (02:01:12 AM) info@adrianlamo.corn: no such animal Page 31 of 48 (02:02:25 bradassBT: indeed (02:02:39 AM) bradassB7: 33203110 bradassBT: amazino how the world works (02:03:27 takes 5 decrees of separation to a whole new level (02:04:12 info@adrianlamo.com: hev. vacaville (02:04:18 info@adrianlamo.com: at (02:04:23 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: vacaville [92:05:12 bradassBT: its almost bookworthv in itself, how this plaved AM) brawls?58?: event occurs in 200?. i watch video in 2009 with no context. do research. forward information to qroup of FOI research occurs, video is released in 2010. those involved come forward to discuss event. i witness those involved cominq forward to discuss publiclv. even add them as friends on without them knowino who i am (02033? bradassah thev touch mv life, i touch their life. thev touch life full circle [02:08:58 info@adrianlamo.com: Life?s funnv. {02:09:24 infotaadrianlamocom: *random" are vou concerned about lookino into your Wiki stuff? I was alwavs paranoid. [02:09:40 AM) bradassB7: CID has no open investigation {02:10:28 AM) bradass8?: State Department will be butt dont think thev're capable of tracino [02:10:44 what about Cl? (02:10:51 bradass87: might be a concressional investigation. and a joint effort to ?oure out what happened [02:11:23 bradassBT: CI probava took note, but it had no effect on operations {32:11:48 bradassBY: so. it was publiclv damagino. but didn?t increase attacks or (02:12:10 AM) info@adriantm.com: *nod"' [02:12:34 AM) bradassBT: re: ioint effort will be purelv political, ?fact "how can we stop this from happenino aoain" {02:12:46 bradassB?: reqardinq State Dept. cables EJ213212 infotamanlamocom: Would the cables come from State? [02:13:21 brads-5587: yes (02:13:25 bradassS?: State Department [92:13:29 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: was alwavs a commercial intruder. (02:13:51 info?adrianlamocom: does voUr iob afford vou access? {02:13:59 AMI info@adrianlamo.com: except for the UN. [02:14:03 bradassBT: because i have a workstation m2:14:15 AM) and World Bank. ?21411? AM) bradassaT: *had? (92:14:36 A?info?adrianl?mo.com: So vou have these stored now? [02:14:54 bradassB7: i had two one connected to SIPRNET the other to (02:15:07? bradassBT: no. thev?re government laptops (02:15:18 bradassB7: they've been zerofilled [02:15:22 AM) bradassB?: because of the pullout Page 32 of 4B {02:15:57 bradassB'I: evidence was bv the svstem itself {02:16:10 AM) info?gadrianlamocom: So how would vou deplov the cables? If at all. {02:16:26 bmssat': oh cables are reports {02:16:34 info@adriantamo.aom: ah {02:16:38 bradassa7: State Department Cable a Memorandum {02:16:48 AMLinfot?tadrianlamocom: embassy cables? {03:16:54 bradassB?: ves [02:17:00 bradass?7: 260.000 in all [02:17:10 AM) bradass?i?: i mentioned this previously {02:17:14 AM) info?adrianlamocomz ves {02:17:31 info?adrianlamocom: stored locallv. or retreiveable? {02:17:35 bradassB?: latrine {02:1?:43 AM) bradassaT: i dont have a com: anvmore {02:17:59 info?tadrianlamocom: *nod" {02:18:09 AM) thev were stored on a centralized {02:18:34 infot?jadrianlamocom: what?s vour endoame pla?. then? {02:18:36 bradassB7: it was vulnerable as fuck bradassBT: well. it was forwarded to WL {02:21:13 bradassS?: and cod knows what happens now {02:22:27 bradassST: hopefullv worldwide discussion, debates. and reforms {02:23:06 bradassBY: if than were doomed {02:23:18 AM) as a species {02:24:13 AM) bradass?h i will of?ciallv give up on the societv we have if nothino happens {02:24:58 AM) bra?dasth the reaction to the video pave me immense iReport was Twitter {02:25:18 Edass??i': people who saw. knewthere was something wronq {02:26:10 medals-58?: Washinoton Post sat on the David Finkel acquired a copv while embedded out here @2636 AM) bradassBT: {also reason as to there's probava no investigation] @2010 hradassB?: i want people to see the regardless of who thev because without information. vou cannot make informed decisions as a public [0_2:23:10 info@adrianlamo.com I?m not here rioht now {02:28:50 AM) bradassBT: ifi knew then. what i knew kind of [02:29:31 AM) bradassB?: or mavbe im iustxound, naive and {02:30:09 AM) which do vou think it is? {02:30:29 im hopino for the former {02:30:53 bradassBT: it cant be the latter {02:31:06 because if it were fuckino screwed {02:31:12 bradassB7: {as a societvl {02:31 :49 bradassB7: and i dont want to believe that we?re screwed {02:32:53 food {02:32:58 info@adrianlamo.com: kk {02:33:00 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: and Page 33 of 48 (02:33:03 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: fwiw (02:33:10 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: me neither (03:14:33 AM) bradassB7': (03:14:32 AM) bradassB'i?: (03:16:02 AM) bradass?T: Wind: at 11 kmih Humidity: 5% >phew< its hot as fuck (03:16:44 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: wb (03:16:55 AM) bradassBT: (03:17:03 AM) bradassB?: its raining there (03:17:16 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: rain is nicce (03:17:26 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: welcome neck (03:17:36 AM) bradassB7: (03:18:16 AM) bradass?i': (03:18:38 AM) bradassa'i': Current: Cloudy Wind: 8 at 8 kmih Humidity: 100% (03:19:21 AM) (03:19:45 AM) bradass87: (03:19:58 AM) bradassBT: (03:20:12 AM) bradassSi': (03:20:41 AM) bradassBT: (03:21 :01 AM) bradassB'i': (03:22:22 AM) bradassST: forms clay (03:22:59 AM) bradassB'i': (03:24:51 AM) and shrubs (03:25:18 AM) bradassB'r': (03:26:00 AM) bradassB7: (03:26:52 AM) bradassBi': (03:22:14 AM) bradassBY: (03:30:28 AM) bradassST: nvm, just cloudy nice i here. its hot. and fucking hot [double emphasis on hot] its also rather dusty i?d prefer the heat over the peanut butter that forms when it rains i grow 3 inches in height when it rains here its a desert. but the ground is fertile its a ?ne silt that "Fertile Crescent" vegetation is an odd mixture of deciduous and tropical trees and usually keeled over from wind erosion i dont think 99% of the people i work with would make such observations humans brought a lot of gravel and pebbles in from turkish so that KBR contractors dont get their feel too dirty when it rains im still slowly trying to download that "leaked" documentary (03:31:16 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: (03:31:33 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: it was (03:31:51 AM) bradassB'i': satellite internet is not very falls in and out depending on bandwidth ebbs and ?ows (03:33:22 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: bro sleep (03:33:30 AM) hours (03:33:38 AM) bradassB7: then there?s the points when generators are switched over every 24-48 im going back to work (03:33:56 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: Page 34 of 48 (03:34:37 AM) info@adrianiamo.com: (03:34:52 info@adrianlamo.com: er (03:35:01 AM) info@adrianlamo.com: sleep (04:06:46 AM) has signed off. {06:22:53 AM) bradassS? has signed on. {06:42:38 AM) has signed off. (01:35:26 PM) bradassBT has signed on. {01:33:27 PM) hrada358?: >yawn< {01:38:43 info@adrianlamo.com: g?day ace (01:39:09 PM) bradassBT: its iate,.. internet just came back up for me (01:39:25 PM) *n0d* {01:40:18 PM) bradassB?: (01:40:44 PM) bradassB?: my ex is wearing my pink shirt at a damn "tea party" counterprotest ash1ihs461 a1!25335_58945795969 [01:40:44 PM) info@adrianlamd.com: Page 35 01?48 (01:40:56 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: that ierk! (01:41:03 PM) bradassB7: (01 :41:25 PM) bradassB?: oh well, its just #35 (01 :41:36 PM) bradass87: he hates i have proof he wore it (01:42:28 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: are you seeing anyone in the .mil'? {01 :42:40 PM) bradassB7: aw} no (01:43:01 PM) bradassah i dated having two paranoid people doesn't work (01:43:12 info@adrianlamo.com: my ex said was lousy with queers (01:43:18 PM) bradassB'h i've had sex with .mil but overall its bad (01:43:32 PM) Cl? (01:43:13? PM) bradassST: why would Cl be involved (01:43:45 info@adrianlamo.com: my ex was 9H3 (01:44:14 PM) bradassSY: i forget it was probably pretty bad in the past (01:44:33 PM) bradassa'lz DADT isnt really enforced (01:44:58 PM) bradassBY: top interrogator here has a civil union in NJ (01 :45:18 PM) bradassB7: i punched a dyke in the (01:45:22 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: tol (01:45:43 PM) bradassa?: half the 82 shop was at least bi (01:45:57 info@adrianlamo.com: you know this personalvlike? (01:46:05 PM) it was all female (01:46:10 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: ah (01:46:46 bradassB7?: i got sick of these dykes and their it was worse than "The (01:47:12 PM) bradass?'f: i even created a "chart" (01:47:42 info@adrianlamo.com: physical or virtual? (01 :48:07 PM) bradassBT: we never got a replacement Cl expert (01:48:39 PM) bradassBT: on SIPR (01:49:20 info@adrianlamo.com: shouldn't be a challenge for you to ex?ltrate a copy (01:51:07 bradassB?: that was probably a primary Cl of?cer was an open position. taken up by a lesbian interrogator who was more worried about the drama than the ex?ltration of classi?ed information (01:51:25 PM) bradassB?: dual plus she was only an (01:52:30 PM) bradassBT: funnv thino we transffered so much data on unmarked [01:52:42 PM) bradassa'x': evervone music (01:53:05 braggeth all out in the open (?:53:53 bradassBT: brinoino CDs too and from the networks waslis a common phenomeon (01:54:14 PM) is that how you act the cables out? (01:54:28 PM) medias.th perhaps (01:54:42 bradassBT: i would come in with music on a CD-RW (01:55:21 bradassBT: labelled with somethino like ?Ladv erase the then write a compressed split ?le (01:55:46 bradassa7: no-one suspected a thino (01:55:48 bradassB7: kind of sad Page 36 01?48 m:56:04 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: and odds are. thev never will {01:56:07 bradassBT: i didnt even have to hide anvthino {01:56:36 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: from a professional perspective. i'rn curious how the server they were on was insecure {01:5?:19 vou had people workino 14 hours a every single no no [01:5?:27 brada5387: people stopped carind after 3 weeks {01:57:44 PM) i mean. technicallv speakind {01:57:51 PM) info@adrianlarno.com: or was it phvsical {01:57:52 bradassB?: >nod< {01:58:16 bradassa7: there was no phvsical security 01:58:18 PM info adrianlamo.com: it was sical access wasn't it {01:58:20 info@adrianlamo.com: hah {01:53:33 brgdassai': it was there. but not reallv {01:58:51 bradassBT: 5 diqit cipher but vou could knock and the {01:58:55 bradassB7: 'on {01:59:15 bradassBT: weapons. but evervone has weapons {02:00:12 bradas587: evervone iust sat at their watchind music videos I car chases buildinds and writing more stuff to the culture fed opportunities {02:01:44 PM) hardest part is arouablv internet uploadind anv sensitive data over the open internet is a bad since networks are monitored for anv tvpes info@adrianlamo.con1: tor? {02:02:13 PM) bradassBT: tor {02:02:33 PM) *nod" {02:03:05 info@adrianlamo.comz not quite howi might do it. but good {02:03:22 bra?ssa'r: i even asked the NSA ouv if he could ?nd anv susoicious activitv coming out of local he shruoded and ?its not a priority? {02:03:53 PM bradass?7: went back to watching "anle?s Eve" {02:03:55 info@adrianlamo.com: oh. those NSA guys. {02:04:05 info@adrianlamo.com: (02:04:15 info@adrianlamo.com: probably thought it was plausible (02:04:40 bradassB7: he had a lot of girl scout cookies (02:05:03 info@adrianlamo.com: not a Threat Level fan. (02:05:20 PM) bradassB?: don'tiudge. he actually kept up with that stuff (02:05:33 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: clearlyI not enough {02:05:39 PM) bradasth and we were in a SCIF. so he would and and talk (02:05:58 PM) bradassai?: NSA how FISA i even asked a hypothetical question of my and he was "if that did doubtful anyone would ?gure it all out. .. resources are plus the mess" {02:07:20 PM) bradassai': we tracked two american citizens "off-the-record" {02:07:30 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: who. and why? {02:07:59 bradassBT: two naturalized american Page 37 of 48 (02:08:22 PM) blades.th one lived in texas for 1? years before moying back to and then started constructed (02:08:41 PM) only part of the name i remember is "Nai?m Mazan" (02:08:58 PM) bradassBT: he was de?nitely crooked (02:09:10 PM) bradassB7: neither were high pro?le (02:11:16 PM) bradassBT: that product did thrown around a saw our report regurgitated by NCIS [02:11 :33 PM) bradass?h CID doesn't make fancy Cl products (02:12:23 PM) bradassBT: it was a massive data facilitated by numerous both physically. technically. and cutturally {02:13:02 PM) bradass87: perfect example of how not to do INFOSEC [02:14:21 PM) listened and lip-synced to Lady Gaoa?s Telephone while ex?ltratratino possibly the laroest data spillaoe in american history {02:15:03 pretty simple. and unolamorous {02:16:37 bradassBT: *exfiltratino [32:17:56 bradassB?: weak servers. weak loading. weak physicai security. weak counter. intetlioence. inattentive sional a perfect storm {02:19:03 brada558?: >sioh< 102:19:19 bradass?h sounds gram bad huh? {02:20:06 info??drianlamoeom: kinda :x (02:20:25 PM bradassB'I: [02:20:52 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i mean. for the .mll [02:21:08 PM) bradass??: well. it SHOULD be better [02:21:32 PM) bradass?'f: its sad [02:22:47 PM) i mean what if i were someone more malicious [02:23:25 PMijgradassa? i could?ye sold to russia or china. and made bank? (02:23:36 info@adriantamo.ccm: why didn?t you? (02:23:58 bradassB?: because it's_public data [02:24:15 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i mean, the cables [02:24:46 PM) bradassB?: it belonqs in the public domain [9_2:2_5:15 PM) Macias.th information should be free (02:25:39 PM) bradasst37: it belonos in the public domain {02:26:18 PM) and get some edge (02:26:55 (02:27:04 bradassB?: [02:27:23 brgdass?h rather than some slimy intel collector MQVIB bradassBY: im crazy like that [02:29:18 info@adrianlamo.com I'm not here right now [02:29:31 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: sorry, phone call {02:30:03 bradassBT: nip {02:35:42 trades.th "Net-Centric Diplomacyshould be a public *do the because another state would iust take edyantaqe of the Page 38 of 43 (02:38:29 bradassB7: photos by the guy who runs ?Net-Centric Diplomacy" (02:41:23 PM) bradassBT: AKA (02:41:23 PM) info@adrianlamo.com I?m not here right now (02:44:06 PM) bradassB7: tips.l (02:44:07 PM) bradassB7: paragraph 2. (02:46:25 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: ck: back (02:46:42 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: two back-to-back calls (02:47:06 PM) bradassBT: im so im ready for whoever you called (02:47:56 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: haha (02:48:32 info@adrianlamo.com: or was that serious paranoia? (02:48:54 bradassBY: would i be communicating with you if i were that paranoid? (02:49:36 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: hey, people are strange (02:49:54 PM) bradassai': re: sent links. basically all published cables that aren't NODIS. or EXDIS (02:50:44 PM) bradassBY: originating post's or office?s Web site. (see 5 FAM 770 for policies regarding information on Federal Web site and 5 H-443.1. When and How to Use (02:51:58 PM) bradassa'r': (02:52:03 PM) bradassB?: [reference] (02:52:47 bradass?: state dept fucked placed volumes and volumes of information in a single soot. with no security (02:53:28 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: only the people you trust can fuck you infowise ;e (02:54:03 bradassBT': so anything published, and classi?ed up to SECRETHNOFDRN (02:54:44 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: in all seriousness, would you shoot if MP's showed up? (02:55:04 PM) bradassB?: why would i need to? {02:55:18 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: suicide by MP. (02:55:34 bradassa?: (02:55:39 bradassBT: do i seem unhinged? (02:56:04 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i mean. showed up for you if Julian were to slip up. (02:56:46 PM) brada5587: he knows very little about me (02:56:54 PM) bradassB7: he takes source protection uber?seriously (02:51:01 PM) bradassa?: ?lie to me" he says (02:5?z06 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Really. Interesting. (02:57:34 bradassBT: he wont work with you if you reveal too much about yourself (02:58:13 info@adrianlamo.com: why talk to me? (02:58:4? bradassB'r': because im isolated as my life is falling apart: and i dont have anyone to talk to (02:59:02 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: I'm flattered (02:59:09 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: How is it falling apart? (02:59:41 PM) bradass?i': family and possibility of transition in near future Page 39 of 48 (03:00:21 PM) its all happening so quick for its overwhelming (03:00:35 info@adrianlamo.com: but you make a cute boy! (03:00:53 bradassBT: im not comfortable with myself (03:01:06 PM) bradass?i': im in an awkward state (03:01:23 info@adrianlamo.com: i den't understand. buti understand the idea. if that makes sense. (03:01:39 bradass?i': and the weird part i love my iwas very good at iwish this didnt have to happen like this (03:01:48 info@adrianlamo.com: one of my ex?s is living as a girl in .au (03:02:05 bradassBT: i dont understand it either (03:04:05 PM) its clearly an i mean, idont think its normal for people to spend this much time worrying about whether they?re behaving masculine enough. whether what they?re going to say is going to be perceived as not to mention how i feel about the for whatever reason. im not comfortable with i mean. i behave and look like a male. but its not ?me? (03:04:34 PM) bradassBT: odd (03:04:40 PM) bradassST: or at least painful (03:05:31 PM) brada55871 8 months ago, if you'd have asked me whether i wanted i would identify as female, i'd say you were crazy (03:05:11 bradassB?: that started to slip very quickly, as the stresses continued and piled up (03:06:48 PM) bradassBT: i had about three successively worse. each one revealing more and more of my uncertainty and emotional insecurity (03:02-05? PM) bradassB7: i spend a lot of time thinking of im now very familiar with the and have a rough plan of how to get portions of it to work (03:10:34 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: *nod? (03:10:39 info@adrianlamo.com: *makes the bed" (03:11:15 PM) bradassBT: have you heard similar? (03:11 :22 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: yes (03:12:25 PM) bradassB?: what did your ex say? if you dont mind me asking? (03:14:15 PM) they felt uncomfortable in their own body. they hated their genitals. they didn?t like looking manly (03:14:49 bradassBT: im uncomfortable with my role in society in (03:15:30 PM) bradassB7: im not so uncomfortable with my genitalia. i mean. it works for but i dont like the masculine features in my appearance (03:17:04 brada5587: iwent on leave in Iatejanuaiy it early i cross-dressed. full wig. breastforms. dress. the i had crossdressed but i was for a few days (03:17:33 PM) bradassB?: i blended (03:17:34 bradassa7: no?one knew (03:18:06 PM) bradassBT: the ?rst thing i learned was that chivalry isn?t men would walk out of their way and open doors for me. .. it was so weird (03:18:19 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Page 40 of 43 (03:18:51 PM) bradassai?: i was referred to as ?Ma'am? or "Miss" at places like Starbucks and McDonalds (hey. im not a fancy eater} (03:19:35 PM) bradassBT: i even took the Acela from DC to whatever compelled me to do but i wanted to see my then-still-boyfriend (03:20:01 PM) i rode the train. dressed in a casual business out?t (03:20:36 PM) bradassB7: i really enjoyed the minus the conductor (03:21:06 PM) bradassBT: as he asked for my ID. and clipped my he made a fuss (03:21 :24 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: that sucks =2 (03:21 :25 PM) brada5587: ?Thank you. MISTER (03:21:31 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: asshole (03:21:35 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: him. not you (03:21:41 PM) bradass?i?: i know (03:21:53 PM) bradassai': it an experience i wont (03:22:36 PM) bradassS?: i 99.9% of people coming from irao and afghanrstan want to come home. see their families. get drunk. get (03:22:56 PM) bradassBT: wanted to try living as a woman. for whatever reason (03:23:14 PM) obviously. its important to since there were plenty of other things i couldive done (03:23:23 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Overall. how did you feel about your sojourn? (03:25:50 PM) bradassBT: idk. ijust kind of blended i didn't have to make an effort to do so. it just came instead of thinking all the time about how im perceived. being self conscious. i just let myself iwas still self-concious. but in a different iwas worried about whetheri looked pretty. whether my makeup was running. whetheri spilled coffee on my (expensive) and to some extent whether i was (03:28:12 PM) bradassBT: but i went to get and bought cigarettes (i know. need to and the man asked about had a heart he couldn?t hold himself back, he looked up and down and gave me this look WTF. it is the handed it back to and tried to keep himself so i wasn?t worried about whetheri was passing as much. because he had no idea whatsoever (03:23:55 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i smoze zero to ?ve a day myself. (03:29:44 PM) bradass?'l: but the point was. i guess my face is androgynous enough thati can pass with ease (03:30:11 PM) bradassa'i': my prominent adams apple is the only issue i was concerned about (03:30:26 PM) so i wore a turtleneck. and had collar up with my coat (03:30:29 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: yeah. i'd say that re. the former. (03:30:38 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: which i ?nd cute. (03:32:29 PM) bradassBT: i dont think i'd need much work done for FFS. ifi soaked for it (03:32:58 PM) bradassBT: *sought it (03:33:01? PM) bradassBT: (my english is BAD today) (03:34:25 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: hey. can you torrent from there (03:34:45 PM) bradassBT: i?ve it eats too much bandwidth (03:34:54 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: limit it (03:35:00 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: with utorrent Page 41 of 4B [03:35:14 PM) bradass?'i': itsjust not working [03:35:20 PM) info@aclrianlamo.com: shame {03:35:23 PM) bradassBT: satellite cant handle (03:36:05 bradassB7: one of the reasons its taking so long to see ?Hackers still downloading portions (03:36:14 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: *nod? [03:38:07 PM) brads-558?: its not much of a picl but here's harry pontino c39d25f27dlpd the man who's mission it is to sell the bene?ts of NCD throughout the State Department Military. and IC (03:38:18 PM) bradassa'h i feel terribly. terribly sorry for the quy [03:39:17 bradass?i?: im not a bad person. i keep track of evemhing [03:39:30 bradasSST: i watch the whole thino unfold. .. from a distance [03:40:01' brew?assBT: i read what everyone look at keep and feel for Hm (03:40:10 since im basically playing a vital role in their life [03:40:29 bradassB7: without ever meeting them [03:40:53 bradassBT: i was like that as an intellioence analyst as well {03:41:09 info?adrianlamo.com: i know the feeling, in a way. {03:41:44 most didnt but i knew, i was playing a role in the lives of hundreds of people. without them knowlno buti cared, and kt?Jl track of some of the details. make sure everybody was okay brada5587: them knowino me (03:43:27 PM) idont think of myself as playino ?god? or anything. because im im iust playing my role for the i dont control the way they react {?:44:15 bradass??l: there are far more people who do what i doJ in state interest. on daily basis. and dont dive a fuck (03:45:01 bradassB7: thats how i try to separate myself [03:45:13 PM) bradassBT: from my (former) colleagues {03:45:31 info@adrianlamo.com: odds are. people feel the same way about you. (03:46:16 PM) bradas58?: how do you mean? (03:49:25 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: at higher or different levels. making decisions that affect you. (03:50:32 PM) predates-.87: in Ethan McCord?s for i watched the guy earlier this year. alter i decided to release. carrying the girl and boy out of the and imagining hislher reaction to seeing themselves on television. again and then he came out publicly and said so on Australian television {03:51 :08 PM) bradassa'f: how he saw himself on television that is (03:51:36 bradassBT: coming home from dropping kids off school at (03:51:48 PM) or picking them cant more liker picking up (03:51:56 PM) bradassai': [afternoon it evening] {03:52:10 yes, but im often aware of who?s making decisions that affect me (03:52:13 PM) bradassBT: most aren?t (03:52:28 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: who is? Page 42 of 48 (03:52:49 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: making them. apart from immediate superiors. (03:53:00 PM) bradass?h Commanders. Politicians. Journalists. the ltry to keep track [03:53:25 PM) bradassait: i have sources in the White House re: DADT and the disaster that keeps going on with that (03:53:49 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: anyone i should know? i?m in DC a lot. (03:53:52 PM) brada5587: not to mention HRC (03:53:58 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: raised there. (03:53:59 PM) Shin lnouye (03:54:32 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: from grades 2-5 (03:54:51 PM) predates-.87: also. some Joint Staff a (bisexual) LTC at the Pentagon (03:55:42 PM) bradassBT: only agency i cant get information out of at the highest levels is the i've never needed a source there (03:56:16 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: anyone I should talk to if you disappear one day? (03:55:29 PM) brads-3537: good question (03:57:10 PM) bradassB?: igave ex?bf a some use he is now (03:5?:29 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: have more cred with the press (03:5?:37 PM) bradassBT: (03:53:05 PM) bradassa7: I?m a source for Chris Johnson of Washington ifeed with my sub-sources (03:59:03 PM) bradassB7: not to mention objective personal experience of and how its actually working out ?on the ground" (03:59:11 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: what about the sub-sources themselves? just out in the cold? (03:59:38 PM) brada5587: yes. they're politically tied (04:00:50 PM) bradassaT: so. they wouldn't be in the cold. per se (04:00:51? PM) bradassST: out i would disavow them (04:00:58 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: everything else. but you don't trust me with that? heh. (04:01:19 PM) bradassBT: these are good people. who just happen to be gay (04:01:29 PM) bradassail: it would be wrong of me to con?rm i' deny (04:01:45 PM) bradass?i': check queertycom (mostly accurate) (04:01:50 PM) bradassB7: 7P (04:01:52 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: fair enough (04:02:15 PM) bradassaT: ask them. not i say (04:02:48 PM) bradassai': (i keep my promises to my friends. believe it or not) (04:03:15 info@adrianlamo.com: can respect that. (04:03:21 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: And do. (04:04:10 PM) bradassa'i': Just hang around the right bars at the right times in Dupont and you can meet them yourself. you wouldn?t need me (04:04:26 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: have. Hung out there (04:04:42 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Any bars in particular? (04:04:52 PM) bradassaT: they keep freakinl changing (04:05:14 PM) info@adrianlarno.com: heh Page 43 of 48 (04:05:16 PM) bradassB'i': changing names and its been a different scene every time i go back to (04:05:38 PM) bradassBY: and im only gone 4-6 months each time (04:06:22 PM) i usually give [redacted] a call ifi need to know whats hot in town (04:07:47 PM) oracles.th here?s some public advice: (04:08:08 bradassa7: [Tweet redacted] (04:09:11 bradass?h iwas [redactedfs ?rst boyfriend after [redacted] (04:09:28 PM) bradass?i': i encouraged him to seek out relationships again" (04:09:31 PM) bradassS?: (04:10:04 PM) bradass?i': now has engaged to his fiancee {redacted} (04:10:32 PM) bradassET: (im a pretty connected guy for a ghost. i guess) (04:12:01 info@adrianlamo.com: (04:13:27 bradassBT: i guess in a way. im just getting started (04:13:43 PM) bradassBT: i im not even 23 ye (04:13:48 PM) bradassBT: *yet (04:19:02 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: this is true (04:22:03 PM) bradassa'l: i keep my DADT trail semi-secure (04:22:11 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: howso? (04:22:1? PM) bradassBT: i ?gure its plausible deniabilitv (04:22:43 PM) bradassB'I: for the more extreme stuff (04:22:56 info@adrianlamo.com: howso? (04:23:13 PM) bradassS?: well. if investigated, it provides a huge number of red herrings (04:23:57 PM) bradassa7: politically it would be a small domestic scandal (04:25:33 bradassa'r': one of my contacts is the Special Forces of?cer who was involved in the (awful) interrogation of John Walker Lindh (04:26:02 PM) bradass?'? he witnessed the death of his CIA colleagues (04:26:23 bradassBT: he?s a and he?s gay (04:27:34 *capture and interrogation of (04:28:13 PM) bradassB7: i know. its all very complicated and dif?cult to believe. which is good for me (04:28:56 PM) bradassBT: but. i hope i can live a less ambiguous life as i transition (04:29:30 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: wish you a less ambiguous life as well. {04:29:41 PM) bradasstit thank you (04:29:57 bradass?h i sincerer believe i deserve one (04:31 :26 PM) bradassBT: {04:32:05 bradassBT: oh. the JTF GTMO Assanoe has those too {04:32:16 info?adrianlamosom: Read it. (04:33:21 info@adrianlamo.com: Anvthinq else interesting on his table. as a former collector of interestino .com info? [04:33:44 PM) bradass?'i': i onlv know what i provide him xD (04:34:14 PM) info@gdrianlamo.com: what do vou consider the highlights? Page 44 of 43 (04:35:31 PM) bradassBT: The Gharani airstrike videos and full report. lragwar event loo. the ?Gitmc Papers". and State Department cable database @3550 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Not too shabbv. (04:36:03 PM) bradass?h thats lust (04:36:25 PM) bradassBT: idk about the he *hopefullv* has more (04:36:38 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: he does. (04:36:52 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i tested him once. (04:37:03 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i denated once upon a time PM) info@adrianlamo.com: the donor e-mail soiicitation was (04:37:19 PM) bradassB7: and leaked the list of donars (04:37:23 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: not (04:3?:28 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: yeah. (04:3?:31 PM) bradassBT: ?donor (04:37:44 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: he ran it anyway. (04:3?:51 PM) bradass?? >nod< (04:31:51 info@adrianlamo.com: that's integrity. (04:38:14 PM) bradassa'r': welt. afaik. he made an attempt to contact as many of those on the list as possible (04:38:20 PM) bradassa7: i dont know if thats true (04:38:30 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: didn't contact me (04:39:29 PM) bradassBT: icelandic reporters from RUV travelled to baghdad and found the two kids. and the reuters staff famiiy (04:39:38 PM) bradass87: as a WL ?away team" (04:40:25 PM) bradassa7: ijust finished downloading HW PM) bradass?i': im not Sure whether i?d be considered a type of "hacker". ?cracker?. ?hacktivist?. "leaker" or (04:42:26 PM) bradassBT: im lust reallv (04:44:21 PMMadassBY: starts off like everv phvsics r' astro class ever (04:44:21 PM) info@adrianlamo.com I'm not here right now [04:44:45 PM) bradassBT: albeit without the algebraic proofs [04:45:20 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: or a (04:45:48 PM) bradassBT: i couldn't be a (04:45:59 PM) bradassSY: spies dont post thinds up for the world to see 04:46:14 PM info adrianlamo.com: Wh Wikileaks would be the erfect cover [04:46:23 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Thev post what?s not useful (04:46:29 PM) infot?tgdrianlamocom: And keep the rest (04:46:36 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: *devil's advocate" (04:46:55 PM) bradassBT: too much Wayne Madsen for (04:4?142 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: (04:48:10 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i didn't know who he was until just now (04:55:35 PM) bradassBT: im "pink hat" (05:13:21 PM) oh. btw. .. china has a massive botnet (05:13:21 PM) info@adrianlamo.com I'm not here right now Page 45 of 4B (05:13:31 bradassB?: 45+ million. grows 100.000 every two weeks (05:14:44 bradassBT: it pings eucom and pacom servers every two weeks at the same spread out to prevent the bandwidth from being detected (it was identi?ed at 20 million in late 2008) (05:14:54 PM) bradassB?: *2003} (05:15:53 PM) bradassa'I: 45+ million ip i ?gure they must have a pro-installed system on consumer electronics (05:20:00 bradassBT: are you familiar with the Byzantine problem sets? (05:22:15 info@adrianlamo.com: nope (05:23:10 PM) bradassa'lz Byzantine is the code word for all the chinese in?ltration problem the ones that get .mil info. as well as penetrate google (like what became public earlier this year) (05:23:16 PM) bradassBT?: yahoo. etc (05:23:23 PM) bradassBY: mostly .gov and .mil (05:23:46 bradassBT: there are several sub-problem sets.._ (05:24:15 bradassBT: Byzantine Candor. for instance (05:24:51 PM) bradassS'I: its what 95% of information warfare people work on in (05:25:15 bradassa'l': china can knock out any network in the world with a 0005 (05:25:20 bradassB7: (05:36:07? their gateways throughout the world are clearly identified, and are being tracked carefully (05:35:07 PM) info@adrianlamo.com I?m not here right now (05:46:21 PM) info@adrianlarno.com: interesting (05:4?:21 info@adrianlamo.com: yet i can compromise foreign networks because they speak machine and use English-friendly products. PM) bradassB?: yeah. china uses a lot of poor spear ?shing (05:43:31? PM) bradassai": they dont get much. since they cant penetrate the (05:48:59 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Do you know of any ops in Colombia other than anti?narco ones? (05:50:11 PM) bradassB?: not i know of state department initiatives to improve relations with mostly because of our poor history and because we?re still tracking FARC (05:50:30 PM) info@adrianlamo.corn: Venezuela? (05:50:45 PM) bradassBT: borders watched closeiy (05:51 :12 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: But nothing speci?c? (05:51:24 bradassBT: smuggling, for some reason a lot of DC politicos don't like Chavez (05:51:41 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: imagine that. (05:51:53 PM) bradassBT: i dont give speci?cs unless i have them in front of me, sorry (05:52:09 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: why? (05:52:24 PM) brada5587: because my memory sucks sometimes (05:52:52 info@adrianlamo.com: You?re a leftist. I take it. Not a bad thing. My dad has a book signed by Philip Agee. (05:53:09 PM) bradassBT: i dont have a doctrine (05:53:40 PM) bradass?h socialism (capitalism are the same thing in practice Page 46 of 4B (05:53:57 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Everyone does. Our beliefs place us somewhere. even if it's ?centrist? (05:54:15 PM) bradassBT: i knowi do. but i havent quite de?ned it (05:54:17 PM) info@adrianlamo.corn: except apathetic (05:54:42 PM) bradassB'I: apathy is its own 3rd i have special graph for (05:54:56 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: I?m a fan of of realpolitik myself. (05:55:10 PM) bradass?T: i dont quite know (05:55:34 PM) bradassBT: seen too much reality to be "polar" (05:56:02 PM) bradassB7: idont like dogma. thats one thing i can say without doubt. . (05:56:13 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Reality how you say. is what you can getaway with. (06:00:36 PM) bradassBT: ive seen detailed imagery of columbia (06:01:00 PM) bradassBT: as well as tehran haiti's reconstruction (06:01:24 PM) bradassST: even the reykjavik embassy (06:01:24 PM) info@adrianlamo-oom l'm not here right now (06:01:51 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Colombia with an 0. Pet peeve. (06:02:08 PM) bradasst37: my bad (06:02:15 PM) bradass?i': im a DC guy. it slipped (06:02:27 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: They have McDonald's in Tehran yet? (06:02:41 PM) bradassB7: no. but i was awestruck (06:03:09 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: not familiar (06:03:26 PM) bradass87: public transit systems. highways systems. its a very advanced way far ahead of its like 19805 japan (06:04:17 PM) bradass?7: still behind that curve. but remarkably (06:04:47 PM) bradassBT: definitely a comparasion to japan, with the mountains and the buildings placed on top of buildings to save room (06:05:05 PM) bradassa7: its no joke of a city (06:08:53 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: What?s your greatest fear? (06:09:24 bradassBT: dying without ever truly living (06:10:16 PM) bradassBT: cliche. but honest (06:10:33 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i keep forgetting you?re 22 (06:11:50 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: i had my ?rst (really! (more?n six months) at 22 (06:12:13 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: They went on the run from the FBI fw me (06:12:30 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: that?s loverl (06:12:46 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: Crazy as a shithouse rat. tho. (06:16:09 PM) bradassST: Iol (06:16:21 bradassST: i dont know if i can meet people who love me (06:16:37 PM) bradassBT: no-one ever sticks around long enough to know me (06:16:45 PM) bradassB7: those who do. become good (06:16:51 PM) bradassBT: but thats not the same (06:17:18 PM) bradassBT: ijust ended my ?rst (06:17:30 PM) bradassBT: so im probably still depressed (06:17:45 PM) bradasst37: (i dont know my own emotions that well) (06:17:58 bradassST: [repression is a bitch] Page 47 of 48 (06:19:08 PM) bradassB?l?: i often get to know people intimately well (06:19:14 PM) bradass?h but it doesn't re?ect (06:24:29 PM) bradass?'l': ive seen far more than a 22 We should {06:25:00 PM) info@adrianlamo.com: so had 1 =2 Page 48 of 48 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES JULIAN ASSANGE and WIKILEAKS, WRITPAPPEAL PETITION FOR REVIEW OF ARMY COURT OF Petitioners, CRIMINAL APPEALS DECISION ON APPLICATION FOR v. EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Army Crim. App. Misc. Dkt. LIEUTENANT COLONEL PAUL ALMANZA, No. 20111146 Respondents. i A Preamble Petitioners Julian Assange and Wikileaks, by and through their undersigned counsel, respectfully submit this Writ-Appeal Petition. Petitioners request an order reversing the decision of the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals, dated December 16, 2011, denying their request for extraordinary relief. See Exh. A.l Reversal is necessary to assure meaningful access to the Article 32 proceedings against Mr. Bradley Manning to the legal representatives of Petitioners, whose interests are seriously implicated by the conduct and content of these proceedings. 1 Petitioners? counsel were admitted pro hac vice by the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals for purpose of litigating the Petition. To the extent required, they separately request permission to appear pro hac vice before this Court for the same purpose. Good cause exists to grant this request given the emergency nature of the relief requested and the serious nature of the issues at stake in this case. Counsel are members in good standing of the bar in New York State, and are admitted to practice in numerous federal courts. 1N9. DFBR. EXHIBIT 92? History of the Case On the evening of December 15, 2011, Petitioners filed a petition for extraordinary relief before the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals, seeking guaranteed access to the Article 32 hearing in United States v. Bradley Manning, which commenced on December 16, 2011, at Ft. Meade, Maryland. Alternatively, Petitioners requested a stay of the proceedings in order to seek any further judicial relief that might be necessary. Although counsel for Petitioners were afforded access to the hearing room on the first day of the proceedings, their request for guaranteed access to the remainder of the proceedings, including any closed sessions involving classified information, was denied by the Investigating Officer without hearing oral argument from Petitioners' counsel. Thus, in light of severely limited access to the live hearing room, Petitionersr counsel have no assurance that they will be able to continue to observe the proceedings and protect Petitioners' substantial interests. Relief Sought 1. Petitioners request an order reversing the decision of the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals summarily denying their petition for extraordinary relief. 2. Petitioners request a writ of mandamus to compel the Investigating Officer assigned to preside over the Article 32 hearing in this case to provide and guaranty access for counsel for Petitioners to the proceedings in their entirety for his noanS and US counsel, as well as any closed, classified sessions for his nominated U.S. counsel who maintains Top Secrethensitive Compartmentalized Information security clearance. Reasons for Granting the writs Petitioners respectfully refer the Court to their Petition for Extraordinary Relief submitted to the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals. Because the proceedings in united States v. Bradley Manning are currently underway, and because of the serious nature of the issues at stake in that case for Private Manning and for Petitioners this application involves extraordinary circumstances warranting the Court's immediate review. Thus, in the interest of time and in order to obtain expeditious relief, Petitioners stand on their prior submission to the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals. See Exh. B. In addition, Petitioners contend that the Court's decision denying their petition was legally erroneous and an abuse of discretion because it failed to offer any factual or legal explanation or justification for the ruling. The court also apparently failed to apply established legal precedent ensuring the public right of access to judicial proceedings, including Article 32 proceedings, or to consider Petitioners' obvious, unique interests in observing the Manning proceedings first?hand in their entirety. Indeed, the court apparently failed to recognize the potentially serious ramifications of denying Petitioners' counsel guaranteed access to the proceedings, not only in connection with the Manning case but also in connection with any threatened criminal prosecution of Mr. Assange in the Eastern District of Virginia, as well as any future request to extradite him to the United States. In light of the extant criminal investigation of Mr. Assange, Mr. Assange and Wikileaks have a manifest and compelling interest in having their counsel attend Private Manning's proceedings. This interest was highlighted during the very course of proceedings on December 16, 2011. Mr. Coomhs, counsel for Private Manning, reiterated in argument the very serious nature of the allegations against Private Manning alleged to be a WikiLeaks source - emphasizing that the charge of ?aiding the enemy? carries the death penalty. Mr. Coombs made specific representations about the potential for pressure upon Private Manning to accept a plea bargain in order to implicate Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks in the ongoing Department of Justice criminal investigation. In addition, Mr. Coombs sought recusal of the Article 32 Investigating Officer specifically because of that Officer's employment with the Department of Justice.2 This further underscores the interconnectedness of this Article 32 proceeding and jeopardy to Mr. Assange's interests. Further, by their very nature, Article 32 proceedings do not result in verbatim transcripts of proceedings that are accessible to the public or to parties with a serious interest in the case, which serves to amplify the injustice of the Army Court of Criminal Appeals? decision to refuse to grant WikiLeaks' legal representatives guaranteed access to the hearing. it is also our understanding that the relevant authorities will not provide WikiLeaks' representatives access to verbatim transcripts, despite our obvious interests in the proceedings. Without guaranteed access to attend the proceedings (in both opened and classified sessions of the proceedings), they are unable to assess the evidence presented against WikiLeaks? alleged source or against WikiLeaks itself and Mr. Assange. Finally, the 0.8. legal representative of Wikileaks? and Mr. Assange, Amanda Jacobsen, maintains Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmentalized Information security clearance. It would appear that the Investigating Officer has a conflict of interest, insofar as decisions he would make in favor of Mr. Manning {or protective of Wikileaks? interests} and contrary to the interests of the United States, may affect his employment status, prospects or reputation with the Department of Justice. Under relevant military guidelines, and based on the foregoing, Ms. Jacobson will plainly have a ?need to know" information arising from these proceedings that implicate our clients? interests. Accordingly, she should have the opportunity to address the Tribunal on her ?need to know" information in situations in which the Tribunal seeks to close proceedings to the public. Conclusion For these reasons, and the reasons set forth below in the Petition below, the Writ-Appeal Petition should be granted. Date: New York, New York December 17, 20ll Respectfully submitted, Eaher Azmy Vincent Warren, Executive Director Baher Army, Legal Director Michael Ratner, President Emeritus CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, New York 10012 Tel: [212) 614*6464 Fax: (212) 614?6499 Counsel for Julian Assange and Wikileaks Certificate of Service I hereby certify on this 17th day of December 2011,r I caused the foregoing Writ-Appeal Petition to be filed with the Court electronically, and served on Respondents, via overnight mail, at the following address: Lt. Col. Paul Almanza U.S. Army Reserve Judge 150th Legal Support Organization Ft. Meade, MD 20755 Eaher Azmy Exhibit A UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Before SIMS. COOK, and GALLAGHER Appellate Military Judges JULIAN ASSANGE and WIKILEAKS, Petitioners v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Lieutenant Colonel PAUL ALMANZA Respondents ARMY MISC 20111146 . . The Petitioners? request to appear pro hac vice for the limited purpose of litigating their petition is GRANTED. On consideration ofthe Petition for Extraordinary Relief in the Nature of Writs of Mandamus and Prohibition, the petition is DENIED. Petitioners? request to stay proceedings in the court-martial of Slater Manning is DENIED. DATE: 16 December 2011 FOR THE COURT: MALCOLM H. Clerk of Court UIRES, JR. CF: JALS-DA JALS-GA ALS-TJ A LS-C R4 Petitioner Respondent Exhibit IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JULIAN ASSANGE and WIKILEAKS, Petitioners, Docket No. ARMY v. Article 32 Hearing in . United States V. Manning. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Ft. Meade, Maryland LIEUTENANT COLONEL PAUL ALMANZA, DATED: 15 December 2011 Respondents. PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARI RELIEF IN THE NATURE OF WRITE OF HANDAMUS AND PROHIBITION, 0R, ALTERNATIVELY, APPLICATION FOR STAY OF AND SUPPORTING MEMORANUM OF LAW Petitioners Julian Assange and Wikileaks, by and through their undersigned counsel, respectfully submit this request for extraordinary relief, pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651(a), Rules 2(b) and 20 of the Courts of Criminal Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedure, and Rules 20.1 and 20.2 of the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals Rules. Statement of the Case and Issues Presented On November 28, 2010, the Wikileaks media organization and its publisher Julian Assange commenced reporting on thousands of allegedly classified and unclassified U.S. State Department diplomatic cables. The cables were also published by other national and international media organizations, including The New York Times, The Guardian, Der Spiegel, Le Mbnde, and El Pais. To our knowledge, the U.S. government has never officially confirmed or denied whether any of the cables are indeed classified. However, the government has targeted and threatened Mr. Assange, Wikileaks, and their supporters, employees and contractors around the world with criminal prosecution arising from their journalistic activities. Although the U.S. government has never successfully prosecuted anyone accused of soliciting or receiving allegedly classified information, federal prosecutors have reportedly convened a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia to investigate whether Mr. Assange conspired with Army Private Bradley Manning to violate the Espionage Act of 1917, 18 U.S.C. 793 et seq., and other federal laws. The grand jury investigation conducted entirely in secret, without any involvement permitted by defense counsel, and in a district with the highest concentration of military and government jurors in the United States so far has included the issuance of subpoenas that reportedly name Mr. Assange, Wikileaks and Private Manning. These production orders have been served in relation to Wikileaks? supporters on media companies such as Google and Twitter. In addition, and of paramount importance herer Private Manning was arrested in May 2010 in Iraq on suspicion that he provided the diplomatic cables (and possibly other allegedly (NJ classified information) to Mr. Assange and/or Wikileaks. Private Manning now faces the possibility of court?martial for offenses including aiding the enemy in violation of Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. These offenses are serious but wholly unproven. There is strong evidence that Private Manning has nonetheless suffered serious human rights violations as a result of these unproven claims, including prolonged isolation and sensory deprivation, and other torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment reminiscent of the worst abuses at Guantanamo Bay. The U.S. government has notably refused to allow the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Torture to adequately assess Private Manning?s treatment and conditions. It is in this context that Private Manning's Article 32 hearing is scheduled to commence at Ft. Meade, Maryland, on Friday, December 16, 2011. Notwithstanding the intense public interest in this case, and Fetitioners' obvious, unique interest in these proceedings, as described below the limited procedures established to allow public access to the proceedings are plainly insufficient to ensure that Mr. Assange and Wikileaks, by and through their counsel, are able fully and adequately to observe the proceedings and safeguard their rights and interests, as well as Private Manning's legal and humanitarian rights and the right of the public access to the proceedings. Indeed, Respondents have failed and refused to guaranty access to Petitioners? counsel despite repeated communications and requests via telephone, email and letter to the U.S. Army District of Washington Public Affairs Office and officials at Ft. Meade. See, Attachment (letter requesting access). Accordingly, the failure and refusal to respond to Petitioners? request for guaranteed access to the Article 32 hearing in this case, and the lack of adequate capacity otherwise to accommodate the media and other interested parties such as Mr. Assange and Wikileaks, constitutes a constructive, blanket denial of public access to the proceedings. Petitioners thus request that the Court grant relief as follows. Specific Relief SougEE l. Petitioners request a writ of mandamus to compel the Investigating Officer assigned to preside over the Article 32 hearing in this case to provide and guaranty access for counsel for Petitioners to the proceedings in their entirety. 2. Petitioners request a writ of prohibition to reverse and undo the current procedures affording limited access to the Article 32 hearing, which constitute a constructive, blanket denial of the right of public access to the proceedings. 3. Alternatively, Petitioners request an order staying the Article 32 hearing in order to allow the Court to consider this Petition, and to allow Petitioners to seek any further judicial relief which may be necessary to protect Petitioners? rights and interests in these proceedings. Reasons for Granting the Writs The Court should grant the requested relief, pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651(ai, to open the proceedings and ensure access for the public generally and for Mr. Assange and Wikileaks specifically. Relief should be granted because this matter involves exceptional circumstances warranting the Court's intervention at this time, relief has been requested but cannot be obtained in any other form or in any other court, and issuance of the writs will aid the Court's jurisdiction. Respondents? decision effectively to close the proceedings and deny access to Petitioners, particularly given their unique interest, is clearly erroneous and amounts to usurpation of authority. A. Right of Public Access The Court?s authority to act on the merits of this Petition and grant relief is clear and indisputable. See Denver Post Co. v. United States, Army Misc. 20041215 2005), available at 2005 CCA LEXIS 550 (exercising jurisdiction and granting writ of mandamus to allow public access to Article 32 proceedings). Equally established and uncontroversial is the right of public access to judicial proceedings, including Article 32 hearings, which may be overcome only on a ?case?by?case, witness-by? witness, and circumstance-by?circumstance basis." ABC, Inc. v. Powell, 47 M.J. 363, 365 (C.A.A.F. 1997}, available at 1997 CARP LEXIS 74. The right of public access is rooted in the common law and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. See, Nixon v. warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978); In re Washington Post Co., 807 F.2d 383, 390 (4th Cir. 1986}; washington Post Co. V. Robinson, 935 F.2d 282, 287 (D.C. Cir. 1991). The right of public aCCess exists to ensure that courts have a "measure of accountability? and to promote ?confidence in the administration of justice." United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1043 {2d Cir. 1995). Access to information is especially important when it concerns matters relating to national defense and foreign relations, where public scrutiny is the only effective restraint on government. See New York Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 728 {1971) (Stewart, J., concurring} ("In the absence of the governmental checks and balances present in other areas of our national life, the only effective restraint upon executive policy and power in the areas of national defense and international affairs may lie in an enlightened citizenry in an informed and critical public opinion which alone can here protect the values of democratic The Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that openness has a positive effect on the truth~determining function of proceedings. See Gannett Co. v. DePasguale, 443 U.S. 368, 383 (1979} (?Openness in court proceedings may improve the quality of testimony, induce unknown witnesses to come forward with relevant testimony, cause all trial participants to perform their duties more conscientiously"); Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 596 (1980) (open trials promote ?true and accurate fact?finding") (Brennan, J., concurring); Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, 457 0.8. 596, 606 (l982) (?EPJublic scrutiny enhances the quality and safeguards the integrity of the factfinding see also Brown Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. FTC, 710 F.2d 1165, 1179 (6th Cir. 1983) (Gannett's beneficial ?fact?finding considerations" militate in favor of openness "regardless of the type of proceeding?). This effect is tangible, not speculative: the Court has held that openness can affect outcome. Accordingly, if the government attempts to restrict or deny the right of access, it bears the burden of by showing that the limitation is necessary to protect a compelling government interest and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest. See, Robinson, 935 F.2d at 287. In contravention of these authorities, Petitioners are informed and believe that Respondents in this case have set aside only about eight seats in the Article 32 hearing room, for members of the media selected by the U.S. Army District of Washington Public Affairs Office, based on undisclosed criteria. They also understand that a limited number of other members of the media and the general public will be selected by lottery to observe the proceedings in an overflow room via limited video feed. These procedures are plainly insufficient to ensure that Wikileaks and Mr. Assange, by and through their counsel, are able fully and adequately to observe the proceedings and safeguard their rights and interests. B. Due Process Rights These rights and interests of Mr. Assange and Wikileaks may include, among others, their Fifth Amendment due process rights and their Sixth Amendment interest in confronting any allegations against them, particularly as relates to the grand jury investigation in the Eastern District of Virginia, which is apparently targeting Mr. Assange in connection with matters that will likely be addressed at Private Manning's Article 32 hearing. Access is also important to protect Private Manning's legal right to a fair and impartial hearing, and his humanitarian right to be free of torture and other unlawful abuse, as well as the general right of public access to the proceedings. on 00245 As set forth above, Petitioners? unique interest in these proceedings is obvious. If prior official statements relating to Private Manning - both on and off the record are to be believed, it is nearly certain that allegations regarding Mr. Assange and Wikileaks will be disclosed in these proceedings. See, Ellen Nakashima Jerry Markon, WikiLeaks Founder Could Be Charged Under Espionage Act, Wash. Post, Nov. 30, 2010 (quoting Attorney General Eric Holder and other government sources); Charlie Savage, U.S. Tries to Build Case for Conspiracy by Wikileaks, N.Y. Times, Dec. 15, 2010 (same). Mr. Assange and Wikileaks need to know what those allegations may include in order to ensure the proceedings are as open, honest and transparent as possible. Consistent with the fact?finding purpose of open trials, which the Supreme Court has held may affect their outcome, Petitioners' counsel must have the ability to observe the proceedings in their entirety in order to evaluate live witness testimony and other evidence as it is presented. Counsel also must have access to the hearing room (rather than the overflow room) so that they may object and request permission to be heard if the Investigating Officer determines that it may be necessary to close portions of the hearing.1 Factual assertions made in these proceedings may well 1 To the extent that portions of the proceedings may be closed to protect classified information, CCR requests that its attorneys who already hold seCurity clearances be allowed to observe the 9 be erroneous, and counsel for Wikileaks and Mr. Assange are in the best position to evaluate them and correct the record as may be necessary to prevent further substantial prejudice to Private Manning, and to protect the interests of Mr. Assange, Wikileaks and their supporters in connection with these proceedings and other ongoing or possible future proceedings here and abroad, including the grand jury investigation and any threatened prosecution of Mr. Assange, as well as any request for his extradition to the United States. Transparency and accountability are especially important in military proceedings such as these because ?military trial courts in our country are nor standing or permanent courts," and may be convened by various commanding officers without any centralized oversight at the trial stage. See Eugene R. Fidell, Accountability, Transparency Public Confidence in the Administration of Military Jostice, 9 Green Bag 2d 361 (2006}. closed sessions on the ground that Wikileaks and Mr. Assange plainly have a "need to know? all information concerning them. For example, it would be necessary for counsel to evaluate whether information was improperly deemed classified in order to conceal evidence of illegality or prevent embarrassment to the Executive Branch. At a minimum, the proceedings should be delayed to permit a ?need to know? determination to be made by the relevant agencies and reviewed by the courts. 10 Conclusion For these reasons, the Petition should be granted. Date: New York, New York December 15, 2011 Respectfully submitted, 15/ Baher Azmy Vincent Warren, Executive Director Baher Azmy, Legal Director Michael Ratner, President Emeritus CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, New York 10012 Tel: (212) 614?6464 Fax: (212} 614?6499 Counsel for Julian Assange and Wikileaks? 2 Petitioners' counsel are not admitted to practice before the Court and therefore request permission, pursuant to Rule 8(c) of the Courts of Criminal Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedure, to appear pro hac vice for the limited purpose of litigating this Petition. Good cause exists to grant this request given the emergency nature of the relief requested and the serious nature of the issues at stake in this case. Counsel are members in good standing of the bar in New York State, and are admitted to practice before various federal courts. 11 Certificate of Service I hereby certify on this 15th day of December 2011, I caused the foregoing Petition for Extraordinary Relief to be filed with the Court, via facsimile and overnight mail, and served on Respondents, via overnight mail, at the following addresses: Urs. Army Court of Criminal Appeals Office of the Clerk of Court 9275 Gunston Road Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5546 Fax: 7034806-0124 and - Clerk of Court U.S. Army Judiciary 901 North Stuart Street, Suite 1200 Arlington, VA 22203?1837 Fax: 703-696-8777 and - Lt. Col. Paul Almanza U.S. Army Reserve Judge 150th Legal Support Organization Ft. Meade, MD 20?55 Baher Army l2 Exhibit A ?hr centeriorconstitutionalrights December 13. 20l I Via Federal Express Investigating Officer cfo Military District of Washington Public Affairs Of?ce 103 Third Avenue Washington. D.C. 20319 Re: United States v. Bradley .I'Lfanning Dear Sir: The Center for Constitutional Rights represents the Wikileal-ts media organization and its publisher Julian Assange regarding access to the Article 32 proceedings in United States v. Bradley Manning. scheduled to begin at Fort Meade. Maryland. on December 16. 20] 1. We request that you allocate two seats in the hearing room. for a CC attorney and for Mr. Assange's non-US. counsel Jennifer Robinson. so that they may observe the proceedings on behalf of our clients. We understand from telephone calls and written communications with the US. Army District of Washington Public Affairs Office and of?cials at Fort Meade that only about eight seats in the hearing room will be set aside for members of the media selected by the Public Affairs Of?ce. We also understand that a limited number of other members of the media and the general public will be selected by lottery to observe the proceedings in an over?ow room via limited video feed. These procedures are plainly insufficient to ensure that Wikileaks and Mr. Assange. by and through their counsel. are able fully and adequately to observe the proceedings and safeguard their rights and interests, including under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution. as well as Private Bradley Manning?s legal and humanitarian rights and the right of public access to the proceedings. Our clients? unique interest in these proceedings is obvious. For more than a year. there has been intense worldwide speculation that hundreds of thousands of allegedly classi?ed diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks as well as The New York Times. The Guardian. and other international media organizations were provided to Wikileaks and Mr. Assange by Private Manning. There is strong evidence that Private Manning has suffered serious human rights violations as a result of those unproven claims. including prolonged isolation and sensory deprivation. and other torture or cruel. inhuman and degrading treatment reminiscent of the worst abuses at Guantanamo Bay. Throughout all of his detention. the US. government has refused to allow the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Torture to adequately assess Private Manning?s treatment and conditions.) If prior of?cial statements relating to Private Manning are to be believed. it is nearly certain that allegations regarding Wikileaks and Mr. Assange will be disclosed in these proceedings. Mr. Assange and Wikileaks need to know what those allegations may include in order to ensure the proceedings are as open. honest and transparent as possible. Their counsel must have the ability to observe the proceedings in their entirety in order to evaluate live witness testimony and other evidence as it is presented: Factual assertions made in these proceedings may well be erroneous. and counsel for Wikileaks and Mr. Assange are in the best position to evaluate them and correct the record as may be necessary to prevent further substantial prejudice to Private Manning. and to protect the interests of Mr. Assange. Wikileaks and their supporters in connection with these proceedings and other ongoing or possible future proceedings here and abroad. Transparency and accountability are especially important in military proceedings such as these because ?military trial courts in our country are not standing or permanent courts." and may be convened by various commanding officers without any centralized oversight at the trial stage. See Eugene R. Fidell. Accountabfiint. Transparency d?r Public Confidence in the Administration of Mt] tl?tj.? Justice. 9 Green Bag 2d 36] (2006}. Mr. Assange also notably has a particular personal interest in the Article 32 proceedings because it appears that federal prosecutors in the Eastern District ot?Virginia have been issuing subpoenas to supporters of Wikilealts in order to investigate matters that. based on prior of?cial statements. will likely be addressed in Private Manning?s Article 32 proceedings. it has been reported that these subpoenas are the result of a grandjury process that has. as is the norm in the United States. taken place entirely in secret without any involvement permitted by defense counsel. in a district that has the highest concentration of military and govemmentjurors in the nation. The names of Mr. r?tssange. Wikilcaks. and Pritatc Manning reportedly appear on many of" the production orders coming out ol'this grand jury process that have been sert ed in relation to Wikilcaks' supporters on companies such as tiOoglc and Twitter. Moreover. guaranteed access for media organization such as Wikileaks and its publisher Mr. Assange is necessary to ensure public access to the proceedings. which is protected at common law and by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Indeed. given the intense public interest in this case. we are concerned that the lack of adequate capacity to accommodate the media and other interested parties such as Wikileaks and Mr. Assange may result in a constructive. blanket denial ofpublic access to the proceedings. See Denver Post Co. v. United States. Army Misc. 20041215 2005). available at 2005 CCA LEXIS 550 (granting writ of mandamus to allow public access to Article 32 proceedings]. In sum. counsel for Mr. Assange and Wikileaks have a professional duty of care which must be exercised not only for the bene?t of our clients but also for others whose life or liberty is at risk. including alleged sources such as Private Manning as well as WikiLeaks supporters. employees and contractors who have been subject to U.S. government surveillance in relation to their constitutionally- protected activities. We hope that you will approve our request for guaranteed access to these Article 32 proceedings. We further ask for your response by no later than the close of business on To the extent that portions ofthe proceedings may be closed to protect classi?ed information, CCR requests that its attorneys who already hold security clearances he ailovved to observe the closed sessions on the ground that Wikileaks and Mr. Assange plainly have a ?need to know" all information concerning them. For example. it would be necessary for counsel to evaluate whether information was improperly deemed classi?ed in order to conceal evidence ofillegality or prevent embarrassment to the Executive Branch. At a minimum. the proceedings should be delayed to permit a "need to know? determination to be made by the relevant agencies and reviewed by the courts. fd Wednesday. December 14, 20! I, so that we may seek any relief which may be necessary in court. Mr. Azmy, legal director. may be reached by phone at (2l2) 614-6427. Very truly yours. Baher Azmy Vince Warren Michael Ratner cc: Jennifer Robinson Convening Authority Article 32 Exhibits A) Secretary of the Army 15-6 Executive Summary B) PFC Bradley Ma nning?s Counseling Records C) MSG Paul Adkins? Memorandums for Record D) PFC Bradley Manning?s Mental Health Records El PFC Bradley Manning?s ?My Problem Email" CID Computer Forensics "Crossdressing.com document? CID Computer Forensics "Amazon order [Facial Feminization Surgeryl" CID Computer Forensics "Breanna Documents? CID Documents Seized in PFC Bradley Manning?s CHU PFC Bradley Manning?s Equal Opportunity Complaint m. orca. to) EXHIBIT A UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY us. sew COMBINED ARMS CENTER AND FORT LEAVENWORTH 415 SHERMAN AVENUE UNIT 1 FORT KANSAS scum-2300 ATTEPHICIMOF ATZL-CG 14 February 2011 MEMORANDUM FOR Secretary of the Army SUBJECT: AR 15-6 Investigation - Compromise of Classified Information to Wikiteaks (EXECUTIVE SUMMARY) 1. On 16 Decam per 2010, lwas appointed by The Honorable John M. McHugh. Secretary of the Army, to conduct an Army Regulation 15-6 Investigation into the compromise of classified information to Wikileaks. My appointment followed a Secretary of Defense Memorandum to the Secretary of the Army, dated 14 December 2010, noting that additional inquiry beyond the previously conducted Army Regulation (AR) 380-5 and United States Forces-Iraq (USF-I) AR 15-6 was required. My detailed report, following this Executive Summary, is the result of a comprehensive, multi- disciplinary, and independent administrative investigation into the facts and circumstances associated with the suspected compromise of classified national security information by Private First Class (PFC) Bradley E. Manning to the Wikileaks organization 2. Summary of Incident. PFC Manning deployed to Iraq with the 2d Brigade Combat Team (BCT), 10th Mountain Division {2!10 on 11 October 2009. As a military intelligence analyst. PFC Manning worked in the Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) where he had unfettered access to classified information. Between 11 October 2009 and his apprehension on 27 May 2010. PFC Manning allegedly downloaded classified information onto his computer, removed that information from his workplace. and transferred that information to persons not entitled to receive classified information. Due to a lack of physical security and supervision, PFC Manning was able to take classi?ed information out of the SCIF unchecked. Because of the on-going criminal investigation, this investigation did not focus on the exact means and mechanism by which PFC Manning allegedly acquired, downloaded, removed, and allegedly disclosed classified information to third parties. Instead, this investigation focused on the chain of command and the institutional systems, procedures, processes and conditions that may have contributed to the compromise of classified information. 3 Findings and Recommendations. The following is a brief summary of the findings and recommendations that are set out in full detail in the final AR 15-6 report. I looked at three specific areas to determine what, if any, factors contributed to the unauthorized disclosure of classified information UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ManningB_00013163 UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ATZL-CG SUBJECT: AR 15-6 Investigation - Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks (EXECUTIVE SUMMARY) a. PFC Manning. (1) Early Warning Signs. The investigation identified several early warning signs with PFC Manning?s pre- and post-accession into the Army. These included; behavioral health issues which were not identified during accession screening or during his security clearance investigation; conflict with his stepmother: "skipping out" on a lease; being an "authority hater?, conflict with other basic training trainees to include an alleged assault: and "tantrum fits of rage." While this investigation has the benefit of hindsight, the red flags that were raised prior to and early on in PFC Manning's military career provided some notice that issues could arise (2) Basic Training and Advance Individual Training (AIT). PFC Manning enlisted to serve as a MOS 35F. Intelligence Analyst. and met all prerequisites for award of the MOS, including scoring 128 on the skilled technical (ST) portion of Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery Test (ASVAB). He attended Basrc Training at Fort Leonard Wood. MD from 5 October 200? through 6 April 2008 and AIT at Fort Huachuca, AZ from 7 April 2008 until on or about 2? August 2008. While at Basic Training and he had some disciplinary issues and a command-referral to behavioral health for ?tantrum fits of rage?; however, none of these issues were conveyed to those conducting his security clearance investigation nor did any specific event in and of itself, or cumulatively, result in action to deny PFC Manning's clearance. PFC Manning submitted his Top Secrethensitive Compartmented information (TSISCI) security clearance application on or about 26 September 2007. On 6 October 2008. after completion of a security clearance investigation and Army (3-2 adjudication, he was awarded a TSISCI clearance. 2l10 MTN. From 28 August 2008 until 10 October 2009, PFC Manning served at Fort Drum. NY and one rotation at the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC), Fort Polk, LA. On 11 October 2009, he deployed with 2l10 MTN in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. serving in the brigade intelligence (3-2) section on Forward Operating Base (FOB) Hammer. On 8 May 2010. PFC Manning was moved from the S- 2 section to the supply room after assaulting SPC Jirleah Showman, another member of the 3-2 section. Once moved to the supply room. PFC Manning no longer had access to the SCIF. (4) Warning Signs and Failure to Take Action. The Investigation revealed at least fourteen warning signs. occurring on different dates and times from PFC Manning's initial entry onto active duty in 2007 to the day he assaulted SPC Showman. These warning signs either individually, or collectively. should have resulted in his chain of command initiating behavioral health assessments, considering disciplinary action and determining whether to suspend or revoke his access to classi?ed information. '1 4 UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ManningE_00013164 hr by UNCLASSIFIEDNFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ATZL-CG SUBJECT: AR 15-6 Investigation - Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks (EXECUTIVE SUMMARY) b. Chain of Command and Supervisors. (1) Failure of Command and Supervisors. Due to a dysfunctional leadership environment in the 2110 MTN 8-2 section and the failure of the Company Commander to provide command oversight. PFC Manning?s alleged pattern of behavioral health issues. disrespect, insubordination. and disloyal statements were not properly addressed. It was not until PFC Manning assaulted another Soldier that steps were taken to suspend his access to classified information. The Investigation assessed what role. if any. was played by a total of 25 personnel ranging from the Commander. 2f 10 MTN to PFC Mannings ?rst-line supervisors as well as personnel responsible for oversight and management of the SCIF and the computer network. The Investigation uncovered varying degrees of culpability or failures for 15 of the 26 Soldiers investigated. (2) Noncommissioned Officer In Charge The Investigation revealed that the Master Sergeant of the 3-2 section. took it upon himself to watch over. safeguard, and insulate PFC Manning from other leaders in the chain of command. exceeding his authority under traditional commandfnon-command relationships. The accomplished this by usurping the first-line and mid?level supervisors of their leadership responsibilities and directing them to perform only technical responsibilities. The NCOIC personally considered PFC Manning to be unstable at times as evidenced in three Memoranda for Record he generated from December 2009 through April 2010. Although he was the NCOIC of the 3-2 Section. he had a duty to keep the chain of command infon'ned of PFC Manning's disciplinary and behavioral health issues which he did not do. The NCOIC also failed to take appropriate steps to safeguard classified information by not enforcing the physical security standards of the SCIF leg, allowing personal removable media into the I find that the NCOIC was derelict in the performance of his duties. Specifically. he failed to provide appropriate supervision and leadership of enlisted personnel in the 8-2 section and failed to properly implement and enforce physical and personnel security measures affecting the SCIF. I have determined that administrative or nonjudicial action is insufficient to address his dereliction of duty and his repeated failures as a leader. Therefore. I am recommending a Court-Martial in his case. (3) Other Leadership and Supervisory Failures. Besides the NCOIC. there were fourteen other Soldiers who failed in executing their leadership and supervisory responsibilities. The contemplated actions for these individuals range from a written admonition to a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand. Personnel in the following ranks and position were all culpable of leadership and supervisory failures: 3 UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ManningB_00013155 UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY SUBJECT: AR 15?6 Investigation - Compromise of Classified tnforrnation to Wikileaks (EXECUTIVE SUMMARY) a. 2110 MTN Executive Of?cer (X0), Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) for failing to provide proper management and supervision of the 3?2 section, as well as failing to take appropriate steps to ensure the security of the classified network: b. Multinational Division-Baghdad (MND-B) and is! Cavalry Division (100). Assistant Chief of Staff, 6?6. LTC for failing to ensure the 2ND MTN tactical network was properly certified, accredited and inspected; c. U.S. Division-Center and 1st Armored Division (1A0). Assistant Chief of Staff. (5-6. LTC) for failing to ensure the 210 MTN tactical network was properly certified, accredited and inspected: d. CD Information Assurance Manager (IAM), Major (MAJ) for failing to verify 2i 1 MTN tactical network was property certified and accredited and for failing to conduct proper inspections; e. USU-CHAD IAM. MAJ for failing to verify 2ND MTN tactical network was properly certified and accredited and for failing to conduct proper inspections; f_ 2? MTN, Signal Officer (8-8). MAJ for failing to ensure the timer certi?cation and accreditation of the brigade?s network or ensuring the preper supervision of the same; g. 21 0 MTN. intelligence Of?cer (3-2). MAJ for failing to properly supervise the 8-2 section and the personnel therein: h. Headquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC), 2ND MTN. Commander. MAJ for failing to exercise proper command oversight over his Company and the Soldiers under his charge and for lacking the necessary and required situational awareness of ongoing operations to properly lead the Soldiers under his charge: i. HHC. 2i10 MTN. First Sergeant, First SergeantiiSG) forfeiting to exercise proper command oversight over his Company and the Soldiers under his charge and for lacking the necessary and required situational awareness of ongoing operations to properly lead the Soldiers under his charge; 2110 MTN. IAM and assistant 8?6, Captain (CPT) for failing to certify and accredit the 2! 10 BCT network; it. MICO (Company B). 2:10 Brigade Special Troops Battalion (BSTB). then 2ND MTN 8-2. CPT) for lacking situational awareness of personnel issues as AIS-2 and for failing to influence and supervise 8-2 operations as the 4 UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ManningB_DDO?l 3166 5: "up UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ATZL-CG SUBJECT: AR 15-6 Investigation - Compromise of Classified Information to Wikilealts (EXECUTIVE SUMMARY) I- 2ND MTN Special Security Representative. 1st Lieutenant (1LT) for failing to properly implement and enforce physical and personnel security measures affecting the SCIF: m. 2ND MTN intelligence fusion OIC, Chief Warrant Officer2(CW2) forfeiting to take appropriate action as the first officer in PFC Manning?s supervisory chain of command; and n. 2? MTN fusion cell, Warrant Officer 1 (W01), previously Staff Sergeant (88G) for failing to take appropriate action as the first noncommissioned officer in PFC Manning's supervisory chain of com mand. (4) Information Assurance (IA) Supervisory Responsibility. As noted above, this investigation found failures within the IA supervisory chain. Specifically. the division- level IA personnel failed to ensure the 2ND MTN network was certified and accredited. and failed to conduct inspections in accordance with relevant regulations and policies. These supervisory failures may not have prevented PFC Manning's alleged criminal misconduct. but they did result in a network that operated outside Army and regulations and applicable standards. (5) individual Responsibility. While the investigation uncovered leadership failures, technical failures, or both by some personnel in the handling of PFC Manning?s conduct. to include conduct requiring behavioral health referrals. none of these failures were the cause of any alleged criminal activity by PFC Manning. c. Policy] Procedures. Processes and Conditions (1) Personnel Security. The Investigation also found that while the Single Scope Background Investigation (SSBI) was purportedly done to standard, several red flags or areas of note were not adequately addressed by investigators. These areas include PFC Manning "skipping out" on his lease. reported conflict with his stepmother and making false statements on his security clearance application. Due to PFC Manning?s age at the time of enlistment. and his home of residence in the United Kingdom, the period of time covered by the was only 28 months. This short investigative time period limited the information the adjudicators had available to make a proper determination of PFC Manning's eligibility for a Further, there is a lack of understanding by low and mid-level leaders of their responsibilities regarding conducting continuous evaluations of an individual?s eligibility to have access to classified information. This lack of understanding is an institutional problem that requires training and emphasis across the Army. 5 UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Manning?_0001316? \f 5-- UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ATZL-CG SUBJECT: AR 15-6 Investigation - Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks SUMMARY) (2) SCI Physical Security. Beyond the already noted failure of the unit to enforce applicable standards, this investigation revealed outdated and inadequate regulatory guidance. The proper exercise of physical security may have provided an adequate deterrent to prevent the compromise of classified information While the noted deficiencies were not the cause of PFC Manning?s alleged unauthorized disclosure, these deficiencies contributed to a SCIF that was operating outside of Director of National Intelligence (DNI). Department of Defense and Department of the Army DA regulations and standards. Ambiguity among the current regulations warrants a review to ensure a consistent set of standards. Further. training is available at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), but current DA regulations do not require or provide guidance to participate in this training. Information Assurance. Both 2/1 0 MTN and its deployed division headquarters did not fully comply with information assurance regulations, policies and standards. Had IA measures been fully implemented. PFC Manning's ability to allegedly download thousands of pieces of classi?ed information would have been hampered, but most likely would not have been completely prevented. Further, appropriate IA measures could have provided sufficient deterrence to PFC Manning?s alleged criminal conduct. There were technical and procedural deficiencies including a . failure to certify the network and a failure to conduct inspections of the network by 5 higher headquarters. Other issues include inadequate training and insufficient regulatory guidance at the and DA levels. These deficiencies should be addressed in order to ensure IA personnel are competent in executing their IA responsibilities. Behavioral Health Concerns. This investigation revealed concerns with how behavioral health issues are addressed by some leaders and by behavioral health providers Command vs. Self-Referral to Behavioral Health. Despite the numerous alleged disrespectful and insubordinate outbursts and alleged violent behavior which should have triggered a command-referral, PFC Manning was allowed to use the self- referral process associated with behavioral health evaluations to keep his personal issues from his chain of command. A command-referral could have provided PFC Manning's Company Commander with the necessary information from behavioral health providers to make an informed decision on whether or not to deploy PFC Manning or to allow his continued access to classified information. Behavioral Incidents Not Linked to Security Clearance. Neither PFC Manning?s leaders nor his behavioral health providers linked PFC Manning's conduct with his eligibility to have continued access to classified information. While the investigation discovered at least fourteen behavioral and conduct issues, none triggered a suspension of PFC Manningis access to classi?ed information or a Derogatory Report 6 UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY \ur UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ATZL-CG SUBJECT: AR 15-6 Investigation - Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks (EXECUTIVE SUMMARY) to the Central Clearance Facility for additional inquiry. it was only after PFC Manning assaulted a fellow Soldier on 8 May 2010 that his access to classified information was suspended. Currently. commanders are the only personnel authorized to submit derogatory reports. Current policies and regulations limit the quantity and quality of information commanders can have regarding behavioral health issues, speci?cally in the area of self-referrals. Commanders need greater access to behavioral health information to adequately assess 3 Soldiers initial and continued access to classified information. Behavioral Health Regulations Training Deficiency. Our finding is that the Directive Type Memorandum (DTM) 09-006. Subject: Revising Command Notification Requirements to Dispel Stigma in Providing Mental Health Care to Military Personnel is adequate in its identification of the conditions necessary for behavioral health providers to notify commanders when there is a risk to self. others. or the mission. The issue is in training both the behavioral health providers and the commanders. Recommend the Army review the training on and implementation of DTM 09-006 to ensure behavioral health providers and commanders understand the policies regarding commanders? access to mental health information. This information can be critical for commanders in making decisions regarding individuals? access to classified information. (5) Impacts of Modularity. During the majority of the 2f 10 MTN's Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN) trainiready phases their higher headquarters was deployed. This resulted in the loss of training and readiness oversight of unit training. Oversight was particularly absent for the specialized and technical training regarding physical security, information assurance and personnel security. The Army must address unit training requirements usually performed by higher headquarters in their oversight role when that higher headquarters is not available during the ARFORGEN cycle. (6) Leading the New Culture. There is a cultural gap between ?rst-line and mid- level leaders and young Soldiers of the ?new culture". The "new culture" is characterized as being; transparent. social media?savvy and isolated from the physical world. Some of these Soldiers develop loyalties to the virtual world which can conflict with their loyalties in the physical world. The virtual world comes with a different set of standards and often no values. What is concerning is that this generation generally feels it is okay to have a different set of values in the virtual world. Military culture relies heavily on small unit cohesion; the ?new culture? Soldier provides unique challenges for military leaders at all levels. First-line and mid?level supervisors. only a few years older than the Soldiers they are leading, generally do not have the same affinity for the virtual world since the expansion of social media is only a few years old. Further. those supervisors. while proficient in combat, are challenged when it comes to leading Soldiers in garrison and administrative tasks. First-line supervisors must understand the differences the "new culture" brings and must work to build small unit cohesion 7 UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ManningB_00013169 $531-? SUBJECT: AR 15-6 investigation - Compromise of Classified information to Wikileaks SUMMARY) Team building must be emphasized at ati ievets of. leadership Professional Military Education (PME) courses. the prencornrnand course and toast commander and ?rst sergeant (CORN 8(3) courses should focus their efforts ptoinding ail leaders with the skills to mitigate the challenges of leading the "new culture" of Soldiers. 4. A number of de?ciencies were identi?ed throughout this investigation. some of which oentributed to the one uthorized disclosure of eiassi?ed information. Despite the time constraints associated with this investigation. the investigative team attempted to thoroughly investigate ail concerns which were identi?ed and provide sound recommendations to address these concerns. 5. POC for this memorandum is the undersigned a- ROBERT L. ASLEN: JR Lieutenant eneral. USA investigating Of?cer CF. HON John M. MoHugh, Secretary of the Army GEN George Casey, Army Chief of Staff 8 ii??i?ia?ai. {new Manninge_oom 31rd EXHIBIT AR 15-6 REPORT Compromise Of Classified Information To WiKiLeaks 10 11 12 ManningB_DGU?l 38H Counseling File Index DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Farm 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning Down range Assault DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning, 11 Sep 08 [Initial Integration Counseling) DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning 11 Sep 08 Performance} DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning, 26 Sep 08 {Event Oriented APFT Failure) DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning 1 Nov 08 (End of Month Counseling} DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning 7 Nov 08- {Event Oriented ?Veterans Day Weekend) DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning, 17 Dec 08 {Event Oriented Black Leave) DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning 15 Jan 09 [Event Oriented MLK Weekend} DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning, 1 Feb 09 Caunseling for January) DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning 7 Apr 09 {Initial New Team Leader) (SPC Showman} DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning Apr 09 {Event Oriented - FTR and Disrespect) DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning 3 Jun 09 [Performance Counseling - June) DA Form 4856, PFC Bradley E. Manning, 17 May 10 (Event Oriented Assault and Battery] DEVELOPMENTAL COUNSELING FORM Far of burl. Ill FM 21.1mm.- simulaan BY THE ACT 0F 5 USE 301. Roma?: 10 USC 34113. Sic-I?ll?! 0 Alli-1y and EU. (SSH) AU PRINCIPAL impose To sum lulu-s in concluding and marsh-u council-In Mining II: when! ms: Far mural-urn mar WWI MW PM n-im. Lon-Mm would w: turn as nullity. Din-Ghan II My, PART I - DATA Nan-u rm: Fin: mmaa Sada! accuri?r No. Dual Manning. Bradley 5 PVIIEZ I i SEP 08 01me rum and Tm of Counubt HIE. 2d BUT, IN: MTN Ill?:l (LI) 350103: Ania, ACT NCOIC PART II - BACKGROUND INFDMATIOH Pan-pan a! Comlhg: [Lad-ruin: ma rum IN the mouths: a . gram or amt-oriented mill-lg. Indm?udn It? MI: and unnatural" Mar In com-rah? INITIAL INTEGRATION COUNSELING PART - EUHIMRY OF nominate Cowl-I- n?ll ucllon during or Iran-dimly "menu! ?wanna. Kc)! Palm: cl Elwin-Ian: INTEGRATION COUNSELING: FV2 Mung. ?11991:: In HHC. 2d BET, 10 MTN DIV (LII. null upIuytd unit In ?It Anny. Thu unit is tn own for its cumulus, "Mammals Ind you In expach perform a: m: high?: standards for Ill-a: Amy md ?u nil. SSE Kyla annual: will In: your swim and all im? will In: hauuhl In him or lung]! until fan-be: unlit: IS IMPORTANT. w: and la Imuw when: yau In. all": you In: doing. Ind. win; ?u plan to dn in the neu- rum: ham: to an mm: In an wan nrieuud ?counseling, Rep-led u?'cum mu mull Uml?um Cod: ormuwy Julia: (UCMJJ action. lie-:9 war man out ml warty. Providu I am of 1mm- LES at man- munulinu union PERSONAL APPEARANCEIMILITMIY BEARING: Naming. the ngulnm which cm wur nu! arm uniform it AR 6704. Fumiliu'rm this rum-nan as this a pan or lam-5 nsddiu- nd mum-wing military bum-in; You will lisp youth-it to standard uld your smut-bin. As: new Soldier. you man be awn: of whatpupal}: mam mm mm. Marlyn sound DH and mum yum?f I comp-clam con?dant Sbldiq PVZ Mum?, Soldim m: mama! to Ills: In my Physicu Fitness Tm wilhm thiny ally: of arrivinpu I new win You: m? u: Imnuwly scheduled for 15 Prepmyuumzrnow on you: own an: and pull: )?owll?wkn conducting PT with the Ih?p. You In Illa meld In mdu? PT :5 pm origin; - Suldin In Lil: ?slim. You Ina}- In chug: ofu but pct-sauna} On Inf 7 given mains. MILITARY Pin Manning. 85 ornaw {nut is an For mining and t?p?ulbiluics dub chm.? which In: pmme for IRTC You will In: mind an ncG?-A Ind lb: shop produq made dun?n; 1h: marina. There nu ma: which m: 011' llama la Sam's-rs of Fun mum. You will In mum on m: other an: us off limit: IN ING- meuunp you uh calms rm. eitlm J: ffan amenity to any: or my school or ynur chain. 11;; mm will be pliaflly dtplogml JRTC COUNSELING: Mania; you u: gain; 1a b: pin; 10 support Ihu brigade? Gap-layman In JRTC. 1h: mum: dun or: 3 OCT ?3 NOV All you bus will In: moped): mulccd In! your has Iqwcd any prim to ?pm: My pmsoud issues Ihu Iris: during lh: will b: hailed by 556 Bum}: or Just Icl us know ifyau mud sum-nu. OTHER Tm- lam mu In upon: mama-11ml {am mam 1mm. separalian 1151's, or upon minimal. For annual-I numerical: Ind no?ulan al' In? or mum-mum at local mum: and AR ans-am. DA UN 1935 EDITION 0F Jun as Is assay: m: ManningB_?0013BT3 Wan of Asian: (Dalian unions [fut EM Wall Wdo l?ltl?IWiI' am ram-m mi Ian-down will} Trauma mm! asp-a5: manila to mail} at 0m Maui?s MM We: and Ila-duck a mid the hr Wuhan and ?alumni Wh?aw.) 5M will nap-mun at mm 5? will pun-um I :m of tuna? LE5 It can mingling Ill-ll? an In? Inn [on ml Ind WOW: 3? wall m; Mr ?m and mun-bl: SH Um Mil?!? MANN 1553? "mum Lin: 5? mil my.? the Edunlmn Cell! for I??l?m wimmll? Sudan cloning: (Thu rummach ml im- pohra m??m mien and checks if Nu mam-dim. and-Inland: 3? NM Mutton. TM :11th ?new:an and mam mum if lume Imp-s Caumni-d.? 1 mm mm me- me Infomi?n shew. Indra-Mun mm mm: wilt? Manning Dale.- 11 SEP Ell mm mm": (Law: In Ila-mimean mo Man 0! Ensure PVI Manning is the right plan a: the right limt and in the right uniform Ennu': PVZ is input 2d BCT camp: 3' policiu EnSum plenty af?rms is allotted for Civilim Education Sig-law- or Gwalior. SSG Jcse Ania Date: I I SEP 05 PART W-ASEESSMENT OF THE PLAN OF acnuu man-mum: [Did the pm of men ?have Ml dam?radmlu?a? rm; mien rs command warm: mo mum and Mt mum-mm mania-d mm" unmma?on for mm muting} amnion mutual cm or Alt-amt; Hots: Both cannula! and the individual comm-lad should a "can! of the counseling. REVERSE, fill no: ManningB_O?O13374 DEVELOPIERTAL COUNSELING Ira-m ul?l?hn run-.mm aqua-W mummy: mnmunmav ?tmmh?w mm mm; I use am. Don-Maul whims: mum: #13. 5mm: Ila-tummy and EA: in! ?Ingram; mm: mule mum?. PART I - mus-m1- DATA mm. 11-: ?rl. am Sam.? 5- Dana! may Manna-mmndiq ll OI mum Hmnan? std'm PART .II - Mm Cumin-?ag: Inn-m m- um {arm comm. .4. or cums-?n and'm I'll man I?Idl mummy-r In mum-nu.) PEIFORHANCE PROFESSIONAL GROWTH COUNSELING FDR SEPTEMBER Farm-amvoim mummuummu ?mm. ?Pub-Hm IV: cmuulwmudnor L?s-h; Sir. MM In: ha?t?umm?q. Vowan u-iumiirpluu. ?Humanitydele ammo? Form In Foul an, JUN 1059 Emma liOllOl-ETE ManningB_DOG13875 a! Mum: Wall mama and a? smr'rnm waldo l?or mu cmmoling union to mm: In. (him Th ado-w 1m {Ma-rsz iu?andlim ?WWI??qu?s-?m ?ml-hum- ?hgml?um in?hp?wn?da?mam?m?e Ill sin-n!- uni-- app-mm: sub-m: "Tn had-rm; I'Mmpam?: am. alarm mm: mm- momma Wanna am m. wmm?m.) mun-am mm IWMMI ?x If sag-mum Manning Duh: ll SEP DI Lat! hm?h: mun Wm in Wall-y ?ll ufa dim.) 3.. Emml'vz ri? unifom Mania; is m: gram. oampany policies Emu" af?rm in allotted For Civilian Education Oppo?uniliu sums-am an: 03 PART - OF THE PLAN OF Am mu: [mm-minutiath (MWmm? rim mm: Mayhem mmwmum M.) main-w: Huh: Bod: ?u manner IMI an individual cannula should min I nun: arm comb-Slug. mum-manna ManningB_DDU138?6 DEVELOPMENTAL COUNSELING FORM For uu nl Inl- lam. FM 12-100. money It TRADOC DATA ETTHE PMVACT ACT 0? ?1le 5 USC 3m. Dipli?unluul Emulsions; 1O UBC 3:113. ur {Ill Anny Ind ED 9397 pm umng pmposg: Tu tllill lunar. In mnducunu Ind mum-?an darn parts-Ian to For walnut: INN FM 22-100. Lama thoqu we [run term I: mcomry. ROUTINE USES: new?: Elk-lulu" II pm I - hummus-r RATWE DATA Nun: (Lust. FIN. My RaniJGude Saau Sean Du- et Cum-llama Manning. Buqu walls: 4 25 55? as Dru-numb? Ham: and of Gamma: HHC. 2d BET, l?ih MTN litll'hlIr 555 Bdonck. Kyle. lut?ligmcc PART II WWO PUFPOSI or Gowilnp: {Lunar um um mama for the comp. 3.9 . am or ?inpatient-u com-dang, and mm" the Ind-r: hm Ind chi-muons pmri'u ,l EVENT ORIENTED COUNSELING FUR APFT FAILURE PART II . SUI-ART 0F COURSELING m- ucus:- during or Emmi, Iw-oquinth Pulm- ul mansion: FVZ Mulmnt. on 15 September fulcd a Dal-nun: Phyiiw Finns: Test by nut-in; less than 60 points when my be uni-Isa up as: FM for ruling a: ?ham: puml mm on and: 0! lb: mm APFT new; meant? regularly Ichndutzd rotunda?. you would mend 11-241mm. II I u-e sdl?ulcd by the mpmy ?56 Consumed puma-Ina: urn-m! and val: no: ta: allowed to nominal: Should 3.1m to mg?uly 13 of M1 635400 If conduct mulls. you amid h: for miscondqu under you: mummy fut merm': almibiliry fa! scanty into me than Fbrc?. uni IMIMIY for in um cur-Hm We will mum: to work low-n1 plain: the "ward le h. Manny schedulcd F0: 6 Dunbar 2.0171. in um ail-up m1 MW AR 130-15. Chm: you utnquirui uk: Ind. pus uric-c nah 37m. You In hem ?muscled you my undcmud the uncut: muons 3m: fail I ?can! APET. mums: immcmatelyynu u: wand-crud: PT film: You In Il'lfh?l'l?d nut Ikpon Sulpmim of Fumbla Panama Anions an buch complain-.6. Van: paman mmdi mid ht ?nned mu you would be incluiblc for pmmotion. puns. Iwuds. u: rumba-nu: You: would comm-m: In In: ?nned until you pus the API-T. Your ?culls would mlh? to be flagged until mu pus: 1h: AFFT In addition ?1 tin] the APFT walnut my manic-I Junikulm. you mild be Run 11:: mm: under ('11an I4. AR 635-100. running in In Other 1hr: mum-1?1: [raw-mud I'm your ill-II.) puMmcc. m: lull ("arable ?mum of mm: you would a dll?hlf?? gym-mod mum-dust. you could nodal: an under other Hun hmublu mde ?inch-7p. Had) my cause undue tuitth 'm cm'liln life Ind any uncut un OTHER and 110?th 0! Inn at bum?l?cnnmumau nu low Ind AFI Ill-200. luau will bl upon roule (emu mm roman It ?15. or upon nut-mum. For Muir-non 4358. JUN 1 993 EDITHJH or JUN :5 camera ManningB_OOD13877 APO Fun at Action: [Damon 1mm: ma: tho su?arwnara mu do after the counsefmg scum: la reach the upon actions mus: no Imam: In My or mam unnatural-?3 balm and mum spun:de Mu Im hr murmuth and sacrum (PM My] 1 5M uzl'l canlm? ta contain In:an will xenon u: an an: own lune to Improve pct-Tannin: 5? ill] [calf-5 in 5 Bunion cull-g: (TM hm: sum-nu: any male or the session Inth a! marinara umramu th- piln 91mm Th- inner-malt Wading-I mm: nulme mmaul cum-assworm-nun Muidull cam-did saw. Mli cums-bu Pv?l Bradley arming um Lad If {Lem-hr: In the pin or new Emu".- PVZ Manning is prepared to put all events in the: saga-wr- 555 Kyle Balunek Duh PART IV - ASSEESMEHT OF THE PLAN OF Mammal: {Did the plan or warm WI :ne dosfred mun? Tm: action a community m- !umr am? Immaf summed mdprowdu ulohu arm-aim .13: tom mine Coun MIN. DIM at All-Imam. Note: Both In! :uunaalar and the Indeual counulnd shauld rut-In a record at REVERSE. DI FOR. ?It. ManningB_DOU1 3818 AFDPIHDD DEVILOFIEH TalL GOUHBILIHB Farm um run-Fla 21-1011: hummus-my]: Mac AGTDF mm I use :91. ??lm ?mum uni mum TI-duln?nln Fur ?WM-In?ammuw 22-1?. ?our: Imam mum a nanny. mu Dunn whim. Pm I - DATA Fi? w; Hum? Saul: axu?w??. D?'dml?? Mamba. PFCJE3 01 ?ovcmher zoo: app-mum Han and mm. HHC. 2d BCT. MTH DIV (LII. F011 Drum. [3602 556 Kyle Imminent: Susan! PART ll - IAOKGRDUND limp-nu a! conning: Ml?l?l?n? hm mm. m. amt-mud may. nun-D'an End of Helm Emu-dill 01 -3I m1 at Ml-Wmm arm Hamil-cm IITC MI mlmalumdr mandrel;- Hm huh-x ?gamut-unit: lad vellum-n. lTl?lGn?; IJdeu?ngmm windy-danan 111qu u?m?thtn ACT. ?my We]le minimal gunk ham Iner mt?! bandit-stunt? urn-Jail: s: ndnu Imu- mama-mum. WEAKHESSES: mull-ham. mum-m.thme l] Damnatamrlurh-un Lam Ilc'wunt?m maniac-um:me nudium M1. mm Mdfa?inly (rail gun yarn-d will Ila-tannin. ?In: no duh: damper good Indy-1t and main: titanium ?t Manny?s-ham Human-idth Yuma?ummu-m uli?ial maintain Yaw: JJ?I?dmden-y-u ram-mm 1!.qu13! ruli?llhumnm minnow :jSiun?ndmuiuiqfuwh-hhinuw. Ihcmfumil?wmumwuuiwnImmy-m om mummies-Hm? madam roarme mun-unmarde .mi??.amr? Mm. Farm DA IORII Juu mu Eamon cur JUN I: owns ManningB_DDO13879 "Hui-1 I mam?: mom 1-1- ?-dm Inuit-l hum mu mull-ill Iguana-um: Th Imam?w: Inn-o Winn-imam: mun-Imam Sign-tn II hind-dill Own-lid: "It! hm? luau-hmamuiu in #:191an a. man of action; Cna?nun to keep SM infomud. Conant? to mentor SM 10 In competent Indra. ?an-m NW um: haw?I: WJ Unborn-lam m: am the tour-dou- In! th- Inilvluunl sauna-ltd should I Heard of ?u counseling. In]! ll". ManningB_O{JO1 3880 mum . -VELOPMEHTAL COUNSELING Forulo ol Hi: form. on FM 2.2.100; Ila prawn-rut lamb DATA IEOIJIRED BY THE Hill-I'm ET OF 197? MINORITY: 5 USC 3M. DIMMIM I nonunion; 1D USO .3013. Emmy of Iho Anny Ind 5.0. 9?39? PHHCIPM. Fwoae: To ?mum-n In wwu??nq ma momma muslin-q on and? to mu'nug uses; For nominal. Ind-r dual-comm um Fill 22-109. London show on Ihlo form mum. 0mm man-y. PART I - ADMINISTRATIVE BET . . Will" mo?il??tuf ?ll?wm a: WBl/m 2 lr7 [do I) We Goonin?on ?Nams and ?lls at Gounu to am piv? PART II - BACKGROUND INFORMATION Puma? of Count Iling: (Luau dun ?u mm for the Gaming 0.3.. or "lan mouth-r9. and Made: the r: odor?: flat; and Marion: print lo the m; Even! Orioolod Emulation For Vanna: my Wodan Dl-tl Nev} PART - mum OF COUNSEUHG Cumulus "can tum or lanolin-Ir mum to oounullno. Palm: of mm: The purpouoflhio nouns-Ila; I: to diam Block Luv: coming up, and who! :1pr you. You haw been in tho unit In; Claim}! 11 111i: point you hum non Ind hoard who" Ill-n: don mound should to nil-no ovoid tho "mould-IL: runner. The Brigade, lotu?oa, Ind Con-[play luv: all had tuna and problem: sound by driatiu Then is obi-alum? NO TOLEIMICE to driohngo?'mu. If you In and-Ir ?gym WILL NOT drink and" any chumnmol, [you mail. you WILL NOT on: alcohol for ?you ?do: 1 . Addillomlly ifrw or: our 2 Ind you Ih mlunioluiomuwho in Mil Ind thy two: but bomd?nkinnw and to luvo ASH. you could [till he causal jun ra- boil; that. Dial:th Driving Wu bow MAW: mum; dawn uldrivc. noun! uni ?are is obsolulaly no unnu- for drinking nod drivinl. Tim is Ill-In mollm my to In hm safely. When you mill: Ind Grin you on! yourull' Ind other: at risk. Call I null or use your Chill of ?mum!? Hoke our: you In: your ARRIVE ALIVE CARD at limo. DIUGS- There is null-lily NO TOLERANCE to on; an. ll in not talented no my cum no I will mom-no 1h: nub-urn punith it you coma up [admin [at drug on. Thu in tho polli'b?ily IDDW. Uri-nulls. DO Hm how I drug, or dcohol prob?. ?null WIT in ASAP. LIMITS- The lounge ?ail-lion wilhout gm ll Jill mild. Condo z'o of?imm UNLESS you one moivod I hrlorfrum 5-2. lfyou ml to [a umidc ol'lhil nap. HUST PUT IN A PASS REQUEST Ind thy nun In in by COB on dendnr. Ifyuu won! uh. pro-1 at In: Immopmp?fm Ind l-ill gallium Taryn. WM: rout-nun and lo hurt: my ul?you: mum-a that)!? u: goingm.or:.nmy.mil Ind ?ll am the risk mum: onliu Ind pn?nl I up; alum for mo. SAFE EEX- ll'you dooldc lo Inn nu. no: you ?no condom union you on having on will: yanrwi?. Be at: ifruu u: ?nial tn. You doo?t mm or and lo STD. If you on link. don't have n: wilhmuno wit: [mules undowoman dun your wife if yawn: ?Mod. Thu: no Ill ouhjm to punt-Inn out madm- UCMI. HUHTDIO- Ruling mm in upon u. If you with to lo hustling. you mm uh: {In humor: ul'cly wnnoomnd by MWR out! you MUST how I llama. You studio moon may I limos. Alwyn troll your weapons I: if ll iI Wad. Go hunting with I buddy. We don't nod to low ml?mpm'?? SPOUSES ABUSE- Tho Amy his I no tolerance ml: do I ohm healing your wlfo. Ifyou so and Il your wife you thin]: you ongoing ll: hp, vol I?lj'. hull-Ia. nod nil your buddy or lunar?: roman yon-?If flout Illa Illa-lion. We can put ran in Ihe human For tho mall? on! you all ullr tn lb: dleI?n tho um day lid-lint This incl-Mu you child": nod you. WRECKLESSIDANGEROUS ACTIVITIES- Th: maul: him Kins: FIJI: MT Only "in in tamarind "In whorl that ll I lihiunm and uhh I hilly. Don't drink Ind Il?l?. Hyou to ?Moro, L?lkl I huddy - II lil'l?. OTHER MW [1110003 Tm lam: uni Ia duo-wad upon: rumor-maul (omit-monme mm. le?ii?l'llt ?11.01 won Mllan For Input-lion madam-nu and abdication ol Ion of hm?hl'conunuml no local um and AR 615-2011 APO DA 455-6. JUN 1959 EDITION OF JUN as l5 OBSOLETE ManningB_DDO13881 3' nun-mm I:me an ammonium: Marika-turfme ?NIP-rtme Mmmh??u?mv? kahuna-ht?. Mills: ?lo-Hoary. all ?will. Dashing-urth urn-Ill. 31'me Ila-syn nwummhurm n?h ?ling: {Thu Eur-min: {no In! adul- 01' me ?33:03: and check: rm Sumt?n?d? Mama If. plan damn. Emmi! mama-minth mum: mu mull-d 1 sign-mummy: 2/7 Q. Nod 03 I Luna-W1:me Muf?n-um? Com-lulu: mu Nata; Both ?n counselor and the Individual counsqu shank! "tall-I 2] record ?lth-a mulling. 1mm? ManningB_00013882 DEVELOPIIENTAL COUNSELING FORM Format?! DATA REQUIED IT THE OF "14 5 use 3o1. Dan-mum: Run-millions: use 301:. oflm Aim 5.0. 53!? gas?; meu To mm bold? Ill mud-in?rm and Houdini mom dill-I ?ml to Minolta. Roy-nus was; For IIodor ombwom 22-100. should um HI fom II mmry. DMCLOIURE: Childm- II mint-w. Nm I:er ?u Rmiqud-a ?ooill Security Ho. Doll o! OWN-IBM aningjm?ey Pm! DEC 03 Ornul'iallim Name and Tilt DIG-mull}! HHC. 2d BCT. 10111 MTN DIV For! Drum. NY 13602 858 ioso Anion. Senior lumlligmoe Susan: Fm II - HWIDUHD INFORMATION rum-on of Goon-Jinn: (Laud-r am no rum ?u comma. I4. Mahmud youth or mm mm. and loom mm km and oosmo'ons poor In on mnubngJ Eco: Drion Cumming For DEC DI Black Luv: ZODECN - SMNGI. PART -SUIWDF Gallium I:th ?it nodul- May or mom-I1 Io nouns-lino. PM oi Bimini: Th4: purpose oflhh muslin; to discus: that have coming up. no who: I ?pool from you. You In Ih: unil Ion. unoth II Ill-I:on out other: in: dune wlool no uhouldb-c ml: to ovoid the was mulnku yourself. Esp-v1 DRINKING. The Eripoe. Bull-tin. Ind Conway but! inns: Ind problem mused by drinking. That is. minimal: NU TGLERAHCE ID damning Il?you Ito undo: no. you WILL NOT drink under my commune?. ll'you In 2 I. you Wiu. NUT boy alcohol fox ?you: undo! 21. Additionay H'on In ml: no you momma mam: loMmummwM who is undo: 2! Incl they or two hon drinking you cloud to luvs autumn could Ii" b: chuiedju? for ooin; more. Drinkmgud Drivlu locum: bqu In AW: and Ilythiu also you can drivc. not jun cm. Them 1! Ibnolocoly no arm: for drinking lid divinl. There is Imus among: my to so; homo ?fair. Who: you drink Ind am: you out yoursoll'uud moon I: risk.CI1 I ah or one your chin cream-mt Hoke sure you hm your ARRIVE ALIVE CARD II than. DRUGS- Thr- iI Iholuu-Jy NO TOLERANCE oh; uoo. is not Iolontod to my cutout-.11le Iocoumud iho muimum pun is):th ifyou com: up posing for drug no Tho-c I: IN my: pomhimy of mm Urinuyniu on DR lids. "you one I drug or noohoel probhol. mo? ill ASAP MJLEAGF. Tho Idiom Imhnlou I pus! is 75 ullu. Candi Ii of! 1mm WLHS you have room vod I. brief from 5-1 If you wont to go outside onhis none. v01: MUST PUT IN A PASS REQUEST Ind lhqv' mus: ho to by COB on Wednesdny "you mm to uh: I. piss. no for m: proper form: Ind-l willpt than: for you Whu'u you land in your pass must. you and o how I copy cryosu- soul: to whore you on going. Von need to no to Irmy.mil and ?ll out Ibo rill: mom! unlim- Ind print I oopy ofmn [or m: 3 an, SAFE SEX. "you deem to hm ms. mutt (If: you won I moon. 8: Hf: ifyou on him; us. You don't wool. and In STD "you In: Iiollo. don?t I'm: us win somon: die"! spoon. perilous undomoot olhor duo. your spook iryoo?ro amid. This In: all ml:qu to puiwnout moor new a i :11 Ilium: scam in upon in. you man to to hunting. you sum sol-I lhI hunter's ?fay noun: n?'crod by HWR Ind you MUST Law I Iim. Wu ml:- to have ?menu-My II limos. May: on! your wupomu iru Ii lauded. Du homing Imh I buddy. w: don?t ncod Io Ion: moon: to stupidity. Em SPOUSF. ABUSE- Tho Anny In: I no calm ml; to do 1 Ioou: boning your wowyour :pouoo um you think you [01.155 to hit hot. mil: my. bro-duo. ml call your hudoy or amino mum-c youmlf from 1h: mum?. We can put you In. an: bunch: for 11:: night Ind you can all: no the chm-m also out dry ifomrod 11m Include: you swam Ind you. a: WREEKLESSJDANGEROUS ACTIVITIES- Tho BlIok River and Kings FIB: Ir: off limits. Only own: in wthorizod am: who? Ihcro is I Hun-rd Ind with I way. Don't drink udswim. ll'you 1o ?who-rs. I13: I buddy - It limos. OTHER Hlmuc'rlouo This iarln all h: hwy-o upon: mum-uni {our loan mum hos-hm]. sepam?on II ETS. or upon rm. For moor-non WI: Ind no?iu?on onou oI Ian banal dim 635-200. wounoo DA FORM 4356. Jun HIE somon or JUN :5 IS oasou'r: Manningaj?m 3533 arm: (Mn: mush. Milt ?Md-owe: rm much-g .1me runand Inna-diam Human-aim sum-imam Dena-?Crate mun I mam! mm- mm herm and mm!!me .mmh Danna-nu. Danahl?l?w. Im?ms?CmifyI-Ii-ulhuhl?u. hn?tluumw.mum mil-unwilling uim mun-dug: Th memfwdu mm: mm maume mama.? Eradicy Mmm'ng an: :1 use on Bin HIE-rum war-am on: 11 DEC ml 2 me-mrwm?llm anew nun?nu.- gamma-ammo.- dodud mall? mmit :3me DIM cl MINI: Ion: Both ?u unwound an Individual annual-d Ihnu? rat-In a (?on ??fth. oomllna. mammau:m 1' ManningB_00013834 DEVELOPMENTAL counsmue FORII Formal ml. IooFu 12.100; 1M promo-um II TRADOC RITA name: BYTHE 1914 Am: I U86- Rogulo?ono; USE ?13.3mm; of tho Arm and 5.0. HOT [555? pmuwu ?mg: To not! In conduit I?d moron mum-ulna on: unlit-mg to For what-ammo loldor Cardamom um PM 22400. Ll?ll'l mud uu um Iota to actually. mums m: DISCLOSURE: II Win. PART I - ADMIITMTNI DATA am Ina-mama Social Security Na. Doualme Mailing. Bradley Prom: 15 JAN 09 0mm Home In! Tull cl HHC. 2d mm MIN Fort Drum. NY 13602 836 late Ania, Senior lnto?iaencc Sago-om PART I BACKGROUND INFORMATION Pun-past oi Gmllog: (Loom! do!? Inc moan In: Ibo ammonium o4. or mm mung. and {mu mo am has: Ind obs-?lial" pic to ammonia? Even: Dn'ulcd Counanng FM MLK wmod WMLIIG Clm?ilt locum duan orlmn?y In town-Inn. The arms mm paindllc??u tool luminous.qu up. um thI I upon: from you. You hove bow in Ibo uni! loo; mush II this lulu} who: other: done wrong no should II: to world mom minute. roundf. The Bullion. Ind have Ind ism no Fromm: nosed by anti". The." I: namely H0 TOLERAHEE thinking mm. It you on not: on. you WILL NOT dn'nk under my ?remen. If you In you WILL NOT our Icon] in own? 1i. Additionally ?you on: ow: 11nd you ?nd younoll'io like an: locuioo o: moon: who is undo: 11nd they on or low Iron winking you load In In" HAP. you could all II: chinoqu for och. than. Drinkhu Ind Dl'ivx'ng inotudu boots mdAW: no anything do: you can drive. nou'uIl out. There is IhIoIme no Ion:qu drink; on! Nut", 113:: Is Ila-?y: mat-harm)! Io lukomenfoy. mm Mink and dive you put mlfood other: It n?Ik. Call a ooh or your club ?comma. Muir: son: you on: your ARRIVE ALIVE CARD II tines. gm DMJ 55-- There 1: Ibrahim)! NO TOLWCE Io drug on. II II not Iolaubd In any can: sad 1 will remand {brawn-um punishment il'ynu cent up with: for drug on. The: I: Imus 1h: of 1m Uri-mph DO DRUGS. II?you In: I on. or Ikohol prowl-m. mu 'rourld?n ASAP. at MILEAGE LIMTIS- mailpr limit-lion whom: I pus ?Hail: Coo-hi Iofrnuiu UNLESS you how remind I brief [mo 5411'on will In go outlidl: anus range. You MUST PUT IN A PASS REQUEST out they own in by COB on wand-y. Hyou mm to who I pom. Is: In: for pro-ya tom: Ind lwiugol Ihoo: rwyou. Who you hood In your pus ?out. you what: I copy oryour rum: to Wino you on. goingInmynil and ?ll on! the mt Income? mun: Ind pn?ol loopyorlhn for Inc. ?51 Hutu. onto our: you won- I modal. Boo-1': ?you It: ?ning on. You don't want or need an STD. If you on SAFE SEX- lfrou lucid: to of II. or I. mane olhor tho-yon: spouIe ifyou'ro nursed. Than on .11 unto. 4011 home so: with our: spoon. pun-II noon the ninja 10W noon HUNTING- Human: scum iupuo uI. 1 ?on wish to lo hunting. yo limo. You and In hm: weapons Ilhty II In times. Mayo out you Io Mai-If a must are the mama's army mum orfucd by NIH. mom MUST have I wupuu II it i: is IoIoco. Go homing will I buddy. No don't and to loot SPOUSE Amy ha I on tomato rqu I autumn-1m: your spam. Ifyou no: so and :1 your spam um you IhIok you In going to hit her, mil: my. Income. Ind all your buddy or Hymn-I team from the sin-Idea. We can put you in tho hunch: rm the ni ht Ind you WRECKLESSIDAHGEKOUS Tb: Block Riva Ind King: Full: or: animus. Only swim in human-ind Iron who": 1hr: is I Hfoguld mum-hwy. body-nuns?. Gem um amoral-mum'- M. sapora?m upon riser-mom. Fm nonunion vouoinrlnonl moo-nu. Ind noti?uIIon of km a! Wm no ml ulmadun Ind AR ass-zoo. DA FORM 43?, JUN 15? EDITION OF JUN 85 IS OBSOLETE APO FIN 00 ManningBRODD?l 3585 M?m: mud-u Wound - humus-r. man-am. ?9945 mat-tum ?Er-1 humusmauuirmm-pm 9f!? anwmwuwm?m mm.- m- WW 2 ham dawn-human?. ?ritual mailmafttg?m Gin mama-arm: PFCanty on: 15 MR up Luann-pom mum Intuit: Du: 15 1111109 rmw-m?_ alt-Em arm wmmummumm: TM mam-day? Duh-I'm cm Hm: Both ml cauru?u and th- lndhiduli muscled nhnuId I neon! of?u mum-?ns. arm-inn: ManningB_O?U13886 DEVELOPMENTAL COUNSELING FORM For guru 22-100; In manual Wigwam: DATA Reclaimuse am. Dunlde aluminum: in us: 301:. simian of Ill-Army and I: o. In? ism} AUTHORITV: PRINCIPAL FWOIE: To lunar: In murmur-a and naming cos-ruling duh lo "warn-In. ?ow? ?as; Fol 'ril?ur FM Tau-u. LlldI-rn Ihunld all Ill-ll I'm II nit-om DWGLOSURE: [Malnu- 'll vainly-3. DIRT I -ADHHIITHATIVE DATA Hm Firlt. All} RandGr'adn Social - Dill nl? Cumming Manning Bradley ?Iranian Name ant: Till-mm ZBCT MTN DIV Fort Drum. NY 13502 550 Kyle Bllonulr, Strgunl PART II - BACKGROUND INFORMTIGH Pun-pun at Counseling: My yarn in mm Id: 0: warming. 19.. aar-?annamaWaa-m-r urn-will at uni-aim malls. and mm: reader?s rm and null-Imam pair In ml mum-aim.) Manny Comiiq [a Jul-rim:r Ill - ill OF COUNSELIIU [his unlin- ?rth] In inn-Idlle lulu-quill town-lulu. Kq Paint- clam PFC MIMI, this is your unalth counseling for 1h! lonlh ul?Jlnnanr. Th: kc)! will: of din-11min": wil be: Umfm Ind App-cum: Continue to hep up with your warms Ind unlinue in look ahud a in will: you will need far Ilium: day I: wdl. A few lime: you {and yourself-or hula; mandala 5 an: 1: ml bail; in the prop? place. You mm 1M: lo anew ll prior i: being Inward but ii required you In [aka-W my? to 3:1 to II. Also. he pro-ultra drum groaning ?mud: lfynu mite: um yawn-i: is will; long and may he perusal! lam ll cal. lfyou and I ridno muttering. axon afyartpecaar NCO: to get you mm. Phylicll Frau: my paspcuivcym I: ?nd. maul: ll": lie APPT will: Sit-ups bum; 11ml nah mm. mli gin you sent hauler album malacth you can do um willhelpln build um um to mamywmI-up count Continua pm rm madman during nub- PT Is wall I: on yourm ?rst. ?rm Hillary Burial; You Ilium-y bush; is nor lid. hum. I will offer an: um um would us: mun lupnm hr: mum 1hr II. an bacon: ?u and or mun! when you henna-i: 'mloldcd? cr If! like: air Milli that you We main; It?s not uncommon but allure 1.1m you hurdle in: I parades? numb]! not '11th ?mu lunch" 01? ?will; ii in lfrou Mancini-5 Iridium. you an luins?u mull In DI if: NCO all: you In pt I Tin: me: use Fact. button lane I: ?an [inn I ?reahe.,umlt. Bah Job Pro?cimy' You hr: mild Hi. put in yanjnb ?hid mkinu. Building in Gunman Upd-Il: Bucl' uni Comma and Sui? 11ml issulucrbin. Um will he um by this Brig-d: Ind Dublin: Comm-admit :5 ill: Brigade Surf. Thus fu- yna unites: premium Im in?: but complain?! by af?om.? or the ?up. imp up on good wort Md i look run-um! to continue wining with 3m: m1er product: in the Over-ll: You were proud? to Private Fim Clusmlnunlh and l?ad ll wuwdl In; um?un The nun-Mp will he Specialist mil with Um mi: f?pmliblli?u Yul: will lug?: an a sprint: Ind will he I NOB in mini?, Om Ulcmrul month: you will likely it looked far a uni-m la mama. Norton inn-win; on uh: ?discussed in?ll: marlin; Ind hn?l??l gun-lurk dunk, ulhcnal lewd. lull-am loan-143ml:th Suldkr unknoth board in lb: wait; mm W:qu impure for thin I: I tun Io mum Ilium u: pup-ad ml campatitiw when rim tine mu. Kai: up good would or?aluarnucnm Thu rum: will he untrund upon: (outlaw-lull ram-mun Wat-w aim-l1. ?Furlth It ETE. or upon nil-rum. For mat-on rnulrimnu aid marlin-?an ul In: in mum-Mum. Inc-J air-ulna and AH ans-29a DA FORM ?55. JUN DF run I5 13 OBSOLETE ManningB_00013887 .wm Samar lnfumcd at my In the lamina lehnduh. Phi-Hula: immu?dmm ?ank-mqu Tum mung-er hula-Haw mum-numme awn-mum and dint ii? tum km [inn-ti. 4U I??l?lhl? :9 hp": Ill-Ia urinal-=3. JH?lnui-nuklp?mmw Inn-annual?, din-ii ruin ummwm Inn! all-hum Th: um Immune-1M4 mac-mm 1m sun-?mum. a? "so a: MWH: mam magma-mum.) -w1llxiw inm?on lm?mving?t upm. ?Hill provide 891:?: with shady min: for hearth mum ?It 3?3 3n.? FAITH-ml??lmaff??mn?rm ?may: Eldon Inna-am ?mar-tun? manna-(om: ammunth nu'l a! Mum-at Natl: Both an annular and Individqu ?amt-d about-d rut-1n a moi-II a! th- ?nailing. mummy :umm DEVELOPMENTAL COUNSELING Fc af ram. 6-22: Ian-Icy I: 1 0c. REQUJIRED BY THE OF 157-! MTV: 5 use m. mam-um: Hamil-dam.- use 301:. hum of la- Arrny and 5.0. In? :ssu: PRINCIPAL PuRPan: To nun hid-fl. in conducting and ?carding mun-lung unfailing to ROME MES: For IUWU Iuddr div-lunar? MW FM 15-22. Luau Md nu man Tom mill?. Birdw- II mummy. PART - ADMNISTRAHVE mu mm: (by. Pam. Ranxa'?rm social Steamy Ho Dun cred ruling WING. BRADLEY E. PFC I as Q- f-?t ?ll 300?? Drama-Han Nam Ind Tm at Conn-Liar HHC EBCT SPC JIHRLEAH W. SHOWMAN. TEAM LEADER un?ru - BACKGROUND Imam Purpose of counseling: (Mru?u tb- rlum m- my. want-04mm Wag. Md Mud? in?ir's {odd and animated: prior to did Maudie-9) Ina": ill-New Tn u: Loader Duty ?pcruli??l Soldia explanations PART - M7 GP mm IE Cupid: 1.th Halon durin. dr Wilbur tuba-qua Ill 1: ?unsung. My Foinu of Milan: PFC Humid; lb: is u: rel-"ls to expend pyramid: dd uni dl?l'ducy I Suld hr amped In lb: JBCT 5?1: Ynu will b: migrant-bl: rm uphoan ?u renninon guidmm palaiud within the. - Menuhin Division Bin: Back. ilpl'l nf?ydu: ul?ilr nib-m. - Th: ZBCT CQIIM Policies - 1h: IIHC ZBCT Conan-Id Putin's - Abiding by the ?dam of mu upped-twat" you (your all was you uphold u: Amy?s Cum and Comic. . Md?un. Six. Sex-[mt an: Ill which will be used thing?s. Pun-dc la: and mum: will only be mu: In by the union You arm moda- uuse min :9 unbound: malt. you. a You will comm-.1ny in a milky; upholding thawed Amy "in: of L-D-R-S-H-I-P - Mum by simpl: [milks did will cut: you ml: nah? am It: my man]. . Undunud um null mm ?has and to lips: In one humanly dimidhhu the ran. a ?u will Imp a up: lint drum-minia- with)!? laden-Hp II lilacs. {um 15H: Show-nu In your hm Linc - You will mm: I: swam: with grouped: in Mr 15% gnawing midtown-dandy inform?: and upcoming mm a You will mm lo the upth plan army's: thorium line In! in the rim uniInm. - taunt!? is no: Id Ilibi. and chow; hep open lid: of coma-?an to hand: quuinm val-h any doubt or confusion. a You will a nil tune: minuin your arm. equpm, and prcyud dqsloy. - A scum 15 I Wm: - swaminlc Ire Our Miinry Ounplliom! Spud-Jig. alumni Ii only as man; Ind will. the 543mm mun: u. a Team an on individual um mm or I minim it I: I mums-d - This is a hy- adapt-um to success which in ?plus the Ibo-er. Comic-lid: a Anny Wines pro?cient in mum-min; you: Mu my may: from How pool Manda}: Command ud Stuff Brianrandy no uan: any union mod to 1m. - Your duty dump-lion willnow and change with n?u'linn to wad? minim. . lucrch 01' yaw duqr that: is no room Far 'checkinl the box' when an ?bj??I-t is 3 Your umivc amine. unmande i: hindrance to you Ovid-ID partial-nu: as it. my be him-rm; your rut aged: Ind hydmio: impacting you: 0mm puma-nu. a aninin?uin in nah-win; will?: In My: i: mud-lb of Inning I ?Saldicr [malignant Analyst Ic. anion no not hm: mom: vision md nan: 3m Imp the 9111:: OTHER 1m ion-n will upon.- rl?llm?l (our than run-wit? W). trillion It ITS. or upon Idiom-M. For sap-union nadir-mt: and mliuh'un n! In: of WNWI an Inn! GWII Ind All ads-nan. awn-Evita DA FORH 4356, HAR 2M5 EDITION OF JUN II DHDLETE ManningB?uom 3889 3.: in WI: enough .l'o mn- uranium-I In: Win?: annular Indra-aha?- Ema In; :Nihlumn.? (PM Mm) Stun mm.- trap-on and mercicnry In all operan a Consumption: 5 day. 0 Ha: Ha: rink at SPC PU: 29? w. [7.59 mg!? a an anti: hum-i 0 film; Cmuspundc? cc Cam?: 0 Connie.- I) Long um: autumn Dunc.- 9 Min": Dam: 0 a Sill-Hf! Wan: mu ?mamas than! Mr om:- nxuun and cm: the sum Midi-arms the ?u diction TM gamma mm? mm: (spawn me mu. Wu mh In- Ilium-?an mam-dual cam-Incl run Du: 90040?40?1 LIN-rhlm?ll?lh? {Did-?l mam-Mama: 1-1 mm plan radio-? 0 Keep the Soldier informed of dutin and responsibilities 0 B: gullible fol qucsuona a Hold the Soldier to the Standard 0 Train the Soldier for upcoming even Signllurl of mm; - - LWWMAN um 325193?: ,2 PART IV A ASSESSMENT OF PLAN OF acmu mm (Old rm gun It mien name In. ruswrs? This I: arm ?u louver nu! ma mum mum and predates Hum arm-Inna 1hr blur-up mum-q.) Cosme-Int. Baum-led Oslo or Autumn". N010: Both the cuunaolor and the nouns-lad should "till! I record of the REVERSE. DA ICE. ?ll, 2m r! Manning BWUCICH 3390 DEVELOPMENTAL couuszun'n mar Pu- ath?Ll??lt??hm?wh?l. mm use 5.0 cal-{55m mm mm Tannin mun: mammal?! mm In lamina?. hum HHWIULWFHIQZ. MMmHIMnn-mm MI ?5?33 mm Iii-mun: I: Velma-1.. mu i . ?no that Hi. Human-m Tin an aim mm aumav 1a. E3 01 gm :3 DEM HHC 15:1 SPC :1er msnowmau. 11am Lawn PART it Imam Emu? Purpm Iran-Imam Man-tum run-num- cows-earn: whim- MIWan-umln?rh?bmm Em D?n?im ?desultpm-Whrm Amway Fur-nub Fm "-me Wummummh Iii-Imam fhm?linn ,9 - Yumd??mhm?mdumxkiunm. . him-s whammw?hm. - Sap-nth mallard 5. ?Jim: Han-uln ?autumn-museum night-Imth LIL-.1 H. alum Cali.th unnatural-we M. Inna-inn? my?. Irwin-inn? ?Emma-WW mWhWEHMu-n?lm Int: mumps-Hunt Hm. urns-dwqu ?Mnmumwm men-lithiuqu ldewIGI-a?nl Unit: Hmrih mum. UWWHM Law. Wanda mum Tum-Elna..me umu?l.uwm Farm #9 Find.? DA FORE all. an: autumn OF In at mum ?maul-want: Carmina ?It-inu- Ynu?qulmnomniu tannin um Mutants-liade :3 cm: waMkm WIW?lr?hu-?. - hum-Allie (H. Mun-u: ??bl hid-rm?" midyde: afra- suaion and sham rm sum mm NW WW d?mf?uw mum Emmy-um; mun-an: ?mmra DLEYEMANMNG Dill: 0? magnum I Infum ?ll Soll?lr ofthairdz?chey. b. 0 Provide cumin Idling fur the Suldi?. in Army] 9 ref{nu-amalga- amlu Hit damn-sub? m: ulnar-mam: WW M.) MIT NW mum-Ml; ml: u'l mum-nu Hula: Both ?u count-Int and {In tndl?dunl :molod should min a mum at th- wumllnu. amt". Fall an. ?u u: or gm ManningB_UOU13892 DEVELOPMENTAL COUNSELING FORM Forunol [m loan. on FM 3-12: propunonl IMII TRADDC DATA THE MAW ACT OF 5 use :01. Rogulo?onl: 10 U51: 3011. Soul-w E0. 5397 AW: PURPOSE: To null loader: In Mg and mourning consuming doll to Moron-Illa. ROUTINE uses: For loan-r downturn-uni LILW Fill Load-rs would on oil- lon'rl run-marl. DIN-loun- is voluntary. PART I - ADMINISTRATIVE DATA Nam rm. Firm, om meme b?i one ofCoLI-Inll?nn BRADLEYE. lE3 -I- Eco? 04,93 Wm Name and Tm oi ammo: SPC JIHRLEAH W. SHOWMAN. LEADER PART II - EACKGROUMO IR FORMATION in- leader?s fool: and phonon-ms prior to cumming.) Performance Profom'onol Development Motu Jun: Purpoio of Cour-soul log: (Loader It?ll mo ?uun rormo mounting o. snow or IN PART Ill summv Di: co?ssuno Geno-loll. HI: noIIon or My ooh-uncut to soon-oan K11 Polo-tin aluminium: Bluc Book Euuro thou stun.de In thoroughly known. and on?! do - ?l'out dolly nation: In indium: ofyou' ulna. me your woman: Ind women?! go hood and hind uni fill an my uninioo. Emir. maxim ill-mun mm radar-n. . The annual is the Ann: Ii v: to uphold it mil continuum Will'l you: pm in their Ilium so a to hop the non: tom informal! and fit to fight. You: puforoumn [or the moth of Mo:- mlinn: this pom tomato line rniumn Ind individual dllpuln'oo It talus-Iona. . sohnol Ihm wore Ion: actuation: Ind con?icts.- mono: . This '5 duo moot hporunt one for momma and Noah. oonlni: than practices. :r CON GRADULATIONS on you oucouu'u mpiuloo or your mining. in This is aim-um in b: was oruo ?um: prior to it incoming owing inn-z All!? [Willi you donionnl Won in mood. Soot My Will mom tho dam-m Ind mom vol! I: mynodnoidocom in nu: stud-Jo you lwill In required in Ill: you ham) to ml: rule. Tum will may: upl?l? omndmi. [I'm Ton Luna- nonhuman! you will and by until you: Tom mm; PFC MANNING in: following is in mum: to your pufumooc fo: the month of Mg} I: well a your upon-lion: for It": moon: or June A5 numbn- of: unit IBM to ma Mounuin Divloion you or: oxpl?ul Io mow. luv: and onion: 1h: mounds of the 1m- Mouomo DWIlj?l'l a You Will condos: youmll'wilh military bum-g ooholiol It: Milton-nails Ind Array nluu in who: you", do. You youmll?ulhymully no your equipment. yourskillo. no your pom-.1 drain to ma you or: My: raid)! to deploy You will tag :1 open lino ofoomunimion will your Whip all lin?. You will know and use your Chain of Com appropruldy Von - You: perfonnuoc through 1354: month of my in shown pin: since you: In: consoling. You hove moi-loom! on open line of communion. :r Ensuri- you: no ow: oryou: ?moulding: um pronoun. it Hull: on: In?th Rombcr 1o conduct yawn" in o. Your physical ?lm? 1! um I ugliness. You will ho dud-ind warts-01H. prom to condom amnion allow in o?moon how. in your in! Your our-ll patron-mom: nu led you In bola] remand to coup-Lo II the MIng Sdnia of m: Month Bouo. - Disciplioo is I mus: mining exercise all the high pron op-lnnpo. ?nm is onlyI going to incl-rm you: opportunities Um: of room produm arm not he Ilium motion-l time hoyood routin- hula to In only from moh- job: no lob-coo mm [All 60041 pr 1 Turn Ludo-r ta million in ulna my snob bro-la during work hourswill: you There will OTHER INSTRUCTIOIIB This loam will on Unbound noon: moulli rum: in? )1anqu (rum. ?onion 1: ES. or upon moron-m. For Iom?m inqule and nook-dim ol low of momma-noon no loul circum- and AR 635-200. Do sass. MAR Eamon or JUN 99 I5 OBSOLETE ManningB_0001 3393 HDFEIIW A In of M?u (Damn mm: mm: suntan: w?i do after me comm:er session met: m. lg: man you?). ?re swam ml? Wm: mm: grandam MIMI banana: and m?ude I mm M: furlmp'muumon and Ian-um (PM Maw} Shun term; a Ind Pru?uicucy 11: Ill opemiou Curran: . 02 0 Mute the rush APFT- .1 RUN In cram ham: or Amy Cumin-undue: Earn: a Collage; a Soldin will pup for upcoming Soldier of month baud Eon. term. I: Buchclurs Mum: Dugnc. a Bunk-n Ola-Ina: (TM lander many-Ina the My punts of!? anon Jr rm: sum-norm: Underarm-m m- ore?! auction Wm? tarnish-mm: rum: Imam-m.) mammal mm rue 61m vulh ur- Inlumwlon than, Individual martian-I l7 Smuhrcuflnmiduu Cumulut WY E. MANNING am: 3 Lust-r ?pendulum [Laws Minna-MM; mm mummy MI man or 0 Keep the Soldier iafmmed of duties and a uvailnbb for questions a Hold the Soldier In the a Train 1h: Soldier Fur upcoming went: Signalm- Uf Com: Daw- OF THE PLAN OF mm" {mamma- aflcnalucmlvo In unwed "sum? semen is by hour and mo imwu cum-Md far Mint-aw mum-Eng) Emma Individual undo-cl; Data or Ass-mnth Nata: Both Iha counnlor and ?u Individual counnlod Ihouid raisin "cord of the counseling. HARM mun-zoo ManningB_DGU13894 COURIELIHG Fall'- "minimum-m: mamw?mmwm m; mum] "In" Iawmm-?mm-mhm . mm Maul-inn-? mm: man-ma um umwu?mu Mm. ?if rm m; barium?h; mum-m m- Wreath-I HHC le'T. TN DIV 5 GT 1.1km P50 pm I - Furna- anion-ml: Wand-wit?er i?uc'uduwu?humutummuum? 1am Inn! awn-mum mi? mum-r ltm?MMHh??o?d? l?tjtt?l?km? .AV ATTEMPT TD (VI-lift HIE DIIUIS AND IS AN ATTF YOU You in?ll.? WUQSTANIITIUKT van ENGAGE 1" FURTHER 0! CONTINUES TO MAY Piotr-3359 1'0! rm: All!? OF AI m-m. IF AWTWEI WARNID THE m. YW CGULDIECHWI: FROM A WMOMAILH AND YOU SHOULD 'm autumn. IIAL vulture IN Chm.th LIFE. IN mm. HAY IE HIE 113 ALI. unanw LHDII Will VENIAL AND HAY Au?ll" IJ'I'Ill-ul NOS-Whl'rl? HLASUIB. mm ?animal mumm.an-wm Fur-m ?Inputs-w ?in??m mum-Hanna: Han- Jill! 1m ormuu 030L515 0' ManningB?ODm 3895 rump-n cum "nu-u- Jumlhn?w mun-r9 Illa-m 33-15:! Mk??un?wmumimwnimoWH-MHMH nun-?WNW: h?ll?l??ff? hum! lupin Mnan mu "Min-0mm wiler Tn mm If. may;an ?wt??l .1 dem- .. 'j 1* In Lunar run-an emu UPI 6' WJ Eumht?unw him-"minimiin walk-Inn uten- II it in and: known. maw?/ an. 2/ mun-1: rot-am: pm roman-acme I'm mm? HM maul-u Wear: hell-?ll! ?mw ml! hm Mal-Am this: Iota a. mum and In IMI ?will! shut-I mm I nut-d of In "Hauling. m: an. aw nil ManningB_DGO1 3895 EXHIBIT DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Headquarters and Headquarters Company. Second Brigade Combat Team 10?? Manntain Division {Light infantry) FOB Hammer APO. AE 09303 2] December 2(309 MEMOR ANQUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Behavinur {3f SPC Bradley Manning This highlights incidences of meats} instability in SPC Biadiey Manning. The waits have extended ever a period {if manths preteding the unit?s deployment to 09-10. His instability seams heightened since November. 3009? culminating in between himscifand his supcwiscr on 2010300EC09 in the brigade can Fciencc roam. 2. Appmximaieiy :hrce months prior to our depleymeni. ei [he-r June at Juiy. 2009i SPC Manning?s supervise: went :0 his mum 10 check on him missing morning formation. Upon renunng his mom, the: supervimr mpiaincd a plan of cams-cave actieri. As I approached. SPC Manning suddenly began screaming He clencheei his ?sts, his neck and (13:25 bulged, and his faint: ca rimmed. He screamed three times, than stepped, caught his breath. and himself. The rest ofthc day. Manning seemed to Function normally. that lime, asked SPC Manning to voluntarily attend a evaluation. to which he azng His supervisor arranged for the meeting and assured he anide in the place and time. 3. i decided SPC Manning should depioy given mangawer and he warned receptive to possible therapy andmr medication. and suffered no athcr major uutbursts. To my knawiadge. however. due to our depinjimem timelinc. SPC Manning only agenda: cue session, and no (in: issued him mcdication. During this tima i had SP6 Manning visii his chaplain at feast once to {cam coping skills fer anger and mess management 4. Omin- Soldiers have wimmed similar behaviour during other sm?zi wants: namciy meiings addressing spmi?c shortcomings such as punctuality and of The uuibursts seem more vialan the deeper we gt) inm that 5. 011 about i counscied SPC Manning the 1055 his roam key. The Mayor Celt required the IGT issue a new kty. During the municiing, SPC Manning shaved a chair and began yeEling about the session. itocii: SPC Manning nutsidi: and caimbd him down. Earlier in the day, he rec:in a psskagc his father that. he obviously found :0 be an unwelwme intrusion. SPC Manning has speaker: of a probiernatic rciationsisip with his famer due in part in a physicaliy abusive skimmed. I assessed his outburst stmmed in part from the siressarinduccd by father?s unwanted gift. ManningB_DOU13362 Behaviour of SPC Manning 13 and ?20 DEC SPC Manning's him twice regarding ponctuaiity. During the cocond counseling. SPC Manning become and began yelling on at ices! three occasions, ?nally ?ipping a table: during a confrontation with two superiors. Neither Soidicr bciicved 59C Manning the physical violence agcitiat them or himscif. One Sciatic! SPC Manning, tintii he ccimod down. Wham icomod about the incident that morning, i talked with him at length about this behaviour. ad vising him i would remove the bolt from his weapon as a promotion. which I did. Additionally. I stated his behaviour could no: be and that i would rather have a stable. unknowltzigcabic pcrfomct over his erratic. if cizirripotmu:t bchaviotir. i gave him the option of voluntary or command-refute! to the. combat 51m; unit. He opted to voluntarily attmd contracting. During the: mum of tho day, 3553C Manning visited sick call for neck pain from his cariicr confrontation, as well as anxiety. The doctor piacod him on 24 hours quarters and a evaluation visit for 2 A?'ct io??cptii with Manning. assess he is salvage-chic ifhe recoich and actively participates in extensive therapy immediatciy [at ices! once to twicc a week on an iodc?nitc basis). coupled with responsive evaluations. medication and foiiow-up on dosages. Based on my iimitcd knowledge of SPC Manning. i assess he suffers from acute po5t-traumatic stress disordcr developed during his abusive chiidhood. may also suffer from a form of anxiety disorder. Ho statcs rcguintiy he bciicvcs he is a success despite Frequent comments to him regaxding his as an intciligmcc attaiyst. I regulariy see him outside his quot-tics during off-time when he should he ciao-ping. He reports it is aimom impossible for him to sloop doc to anxiety regarding reporting iatc to work. 3. SPC Manning stated repeatedly that he deco not feel he has any problems. and therapy Wit! bc ofiittic to no voice. He stated he trusts virtualiy no therapists. and scams to fcci disdain for them. Ho is guarde? certain impacts ofhis private iifc. and compartmentalich what information he will and no: share with others. Wizat he does not Sham scents to add a signi?cant amount of internal and anxiety for Manning. H: ms to be a cangiomerctioo of ambition. and deep-scated insecurity. 9. Tito point of contact for this memorandum ES the undersigned. at I E, 1w ?:uw-M PAUL ADHERE MSG. USA. Master Sergeant ManningB_DDU13353 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Headquarters and Headquarters Company. Secnnd Brigade Combat Team it)? Mountain Division (Light infantry} FOB Hammer APO. AE 09308 36 APR 09 EMORA NDUM FOR RECGR SUBJECT T: Recent Behaviour of SPC Bradtey Manning t. This additional memorandum supports a 2} DEC MFR. and highlights continued innidennes of mental instability in SFC Bradley Manning. The events have reemcrgud and intensi?ed over a period of two weeks. Hi5 instability seems heightmed since midPAprii 2610. culminating in ?'equent catatonic periods and claims of dissoczation 2. Manning has exhibited bizarre behaviour. stepping in mid-sentence dining conversations. giving blank states when Spoken to. and similar behaviour. which has increased in frequency and intensity. This problem gives an impression nf disrespect and to his noncommissioned of?cers and of?cers. 3. Additionally. Manning has reported an altered or dissociated state recently. This state gives him the impression of watching himself an a screen, as though events around him. and pertaining to him. are not actually occurring TG-hirn but someone else 4. SPC Manning has reported having no sense of time and frequentiy ?nds himself in a dreamlike state. He claims this issue resulted in late reporting to his place of duty on 26 APR it}. 5. His of?ces report hint to be distant and distracted at best. His duty competence does not seem to be signi?cantly affeeted. He sometimes produces accurate products in a timely manner. Other days his performance is signi?cantly degraded. We are unsure at this time if he presents a threat to himself. though he does not seem to be in danger merrily in my cstirnnticn. His inatnbility is a constant of concern. however, due in its inherently fluid nature. 6. Manning seen-is tn create internal pressure due to unnamed conflicts he seems unwitting tn discuss. and incapable of handling by himself. tannin-tended he see CH Howell on 25 APR :0 to set: if the chaplain could provide cnping skills (it an avenue for discussmn net previously explored. ManningB_00013364 SUBJECT: Recent Behaviour Bradiey Manning 7. These issues seem to arise in clusters due :0 internal pressures. SPC Manning retreated {be same as other Soidiers in the section. 8 arr: with dissociative identity discrder. and sametirnes sense the presence efaitered personaiities during SPC Manning?s unsettled periods of behaviour. By seif~admissiem he experienced a :ess-thsn-ideai ehiidhood and abandonmenmwe situations. I do not assess at this time the: SPC Manning?s behaviour is Spurieus but 0f?! deeper medieai eonditien 1111an a: this time. My ceneem is that Manning?s mndition is deteriorating and possibly becoming detrimental 10 the good order of the unit. if requireri in PCS. i fear the remit would be fer SPC Manning. including M1 action and a chapter under conditions ether~thari honorable. eteeiera. 9. SPC Manning cantirrues ?0 report ihe therapy he receives is unpr?ductive with the dealer's discussiens and therapeutic approaches efnc value. He sent me an email on 24455 APR i0, which he later claimed he tried to recs-1E. in Summary. Manning stated the problem is longstanding; deep?seated and intensifying desirile his best efforts to the contrary. He eieims his life and mnerionaiily is: extremely degraded due to his prebiems. He fears his enly help lies in discipiinary action and possibiy chapter. He repairs dif?culty in sieeping. concentrating. Hiking with when. 10 The point ofcontaet for this memoremi arr: is the undersignedi ADKINS MSG. USA Master Sergeani ManningB_ODU?l 3355 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Headquarters and Headquach Company. Second Brigade Combat Team 10"" Mountain Divisian itighi Infantry) FOE Hammer APB. ME. 093% MAY EU MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Recent Behaviour of Bradley Manning 1. This additional memorandum Siippiirts Zi QEE {19 and APR 10 MFRS. and highiights cantiriued incidences of meats? instabit'iiy Smitty Manning. 2. On SPC Manning ic? the work ares during a unit infurmai meal. I attributed his absence to discomfort With some 9f his cowcrkers. and assmned he moved to another work arta in order not to partitipate in the ?mt?tion. Abuut an hour iattr. a Sohiier infurmcd ma SPC Manning was sitting (in the of a storage m?m in a fetal 3_ When i uttered the room. SPC Manning was sitting upright with his knew tucked up towards his chin. ohvinusiy agitatcid about something. Hi: clutched his hand as thnugh in pain. He cicnched his eyes shut and said naming I noticed beside him is {hiding chair with cut marks an the padded seat. and an 0pm gerber knife triad: at SPC Manning?s feet. Severn-.1 pints; of Cut vinyl 33y min}. 011 the scat he: inched with the blade the words. ?i During the caurse 0f the convarsationi I ?etuminad he was not in immndiate danger of cutting himseii'. He: stated he did at}! knew whyhe etched these wards 4. Through repeated questions. i was able to get SPC Manning to respond. He then spoke at length about issws. Ht: stamd he felt he was mt there, and was not a pmon- He: stated he had m3 persenality. He went at: It) expiain that the aim parser: who was speaking was a pawnality of the. pagan sitting on the ?oor in ohvicaus pain. tie the anaiogy of him being a turtle with a care personality. and swam? layers of hardenw shell. ?agmmted and designed to protect the: core parsanatity. and function in different situations as the need requimd Hi.- aim drew the anaiagy ofhis personaiitits being (trauma. 5. Manning receittiy suffered a recent brcaivup with 3 12105:: friend the Emma. This situation has caused him ccnsiderabie distress. hath personally and concerning semi: ofhis property be stored with ihz?s individuai for safekecping. EPIC Manning ?uczuated during the canversation bem'ee-n a cairn individual and one in pain As he spoke he sacmtd to he unhapgy with what he raveaioti, and withdrew back to the state in ManningB_ODO13366 ..--I SUBEECT: Behaviour of?S?? Bradiey Manning which I {Quad him. After about an hour. i was called to work and had is have SPC Manning. i checked in: hem Eater He seemed t9 bc calm and I ic? me do other wcrk. 3 comidercd during the canvarsation whether to ahead Manning hi5 22mm". 23111 decide? he seemed ta rccovt: suf?cimtiy to finish zhe 1&5: {am hours efh?s shift. Late: in the Evening SPC Manning Struck Shewman in $23: face: during an argument. 8. A?crhis discussion with CPT Wursiay. ensqu hf: wen! :0 his mom withcut weapon. We spoke at length ahmn his chiidhmd and masons forjoin'mg the Army. ?e alse stated he had nu intenti?? cfst?king SPC and had no idea why he did it. He then Stated he: may have rammed as perceived ?ights de?iz?vercd by SPC Showman prior to Sinking her. He also expressmi signi?cam comm-n ofhis actions. inctuding UCMJ and 0TH discharge. He staae?- aha: extra duty might cause: further aggravaiion. He. 33:1th this in a matter of fact mam?2?, no: threatening. He aEso expressed wnacm as. to where he wnuid war}: in the mining days. mid ham nothing had ham decided a: :h?s point but my dtsire was {a see: he rest-Wad proper Ezeauncnt far has He returned to his ara?ier at appr?ximafely The paint cf contact. far this: mmnerandum is {hit under?ignai Eli?I \v 5/ PAC-L {5833. Master Sea-gems ManningB_DDU13367 EXHIBIT AR 15?6 Report Compromise of Classified Information to Wikiieaks DATE: 30 June 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Recommended to Behavioral Heaith at Fort Drum by NCOIC. Session for 60 minutes and released without limitations. ManningB_OOD14069 Tam-piggy" Ema?momma}: CAKE Patient MANNING. BRADLEY EDWARD 03:27.10 Jun 2009 1315 EDT App! 'lype. SPEC Treatment Faaluar. GUTHRJE AHC CLINIC vaider HESWEBER.PETER Oldpatient MA RADLEY HJWA DIM-1 5'3395131 Rank PRIVATE FIRRT CLASS Hull. FHA Help! Rut Rm. RECORDS 3003-1941 STUDENT CLINIC Tn' PVCM: ?Emil?! OF MEDICAL STANDARD Elli?Ii] . ION 1'5 BY THE PRIVACY ACT 1931 Prisrrihed (SS-A Ind [l THES INFORMAUUK [h :1 VIDJTEON DIJ FEDERAL. HE. PRUSECUTED 'h EA 1,1131ng CHBQEOLOG REICQEQQLMEDIQL CABL Jun 20091253 Flti'iijr.? Fl Drum NY Clinic: Fifth-lion Clinic Prm'idc'r: RESWEBEH. MANNING, ELM-AH Hunk CLASS UHIL. Cuipl Rec Fc?m' I cu . .. . Am?: "airs rm; unwacvm'r urmumoarzun ACCESS mum-bu: cat-urn IEMR HS 1 IBM A CF FEDERAL 1 .AW VHF. Wll..l. m; PROSECLTED Hl AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks DATE: 19 August 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Walk in at Behavioral Health at Fort Drum. Session for 20?30 minutes and released without limitations. ManningB_OOD14072 qty-23.114 REFURD RECORD 0F MEDICAL egg Patient MANNING. BRADLEY EDWARD Date 19 Aug 20GB 1006 EDT Treatmen'. facihty. GUTHFIIE AHC Climc: CUNIC Patient Siam: Outpali-anl Appl Type EST F'mwdar. DEHERRERAMENHETH Smsur-?SSN MANNING, BRADLEY Rank PRIVATE FIRST CLASS 'lJrL ll W?C?lPilh 0mm Rm RECORDS STUDENT r9 Hu'oI-m or 11mm. CAME sunlan FORM GOD (HEY. 5.1 HHS 105- IF. lH1-.' ACT um WI i'mniln-d #3:?er Ind If?th r0 nus IS A Dr LAW viommns WILL BE mm RECORD RECORD OF Mr?qa?ma MANNING. BRADLEY Hunk? FIRST CLASS L?mt Ouupn?cc Hm' RECORDS PCM: Tcl__ I E. RECORD OF FARE 3.1 .LMMRIJ FORM 60!] (HI-1V. Hus EMHRMA 1 ILIN 1H IE3 THE PRIVACY ACT OF UNnLiTl?jmzt-rn full-'55 i'rHcrihHl tax-3.x m1 TC THIS :5 or FEDERAL LAW wommns WILL BE ?ii-?R 1r. .., ManningB_UUD14074 AR 15?6 Report Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks DATE: 15 September 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: SF 500 SUMMARY: Appointment at Behavioral Health at Fort Drum. Session for 55 minutes and released without limitations. ManningB_00014075 CHRONULOGICAL Patient: MANNING, EDWARD Date: 15 2009 GEM EDT Tiaalman: Family. GUTHRIE AHC CLINIC Patient Status.- Oulpa?ent App! Tyne: SPEC Provider 5pm: :5er MANNING. anmEv Rank FRI "(Kl?if HRST CLASS up" PEA Hum: m. Rm: RECORDS 3111mm CLINIC m. PCM RECORD MEDICAL FARE. STAMMHLI FORM mower s: Hus :5 :1 Rn rm "rm; PR1 vars? ACT or 1-91: sin-1mm cm "a mu: .?Cr nus If: VIOLATION 0r Law neurons WILL BE PRCISFICIJTEE. FIRW HI f'FRi Ram?m INFORMATION ?r??tl?'l'hC'TFD THE PRIVACY ACT OF i974 1 ifih A OF FEDERAL LAW. VIOLATDRS BE ManningE_OGO14U?? A .11.. Rank L-nll. ?lm: Rn Tel. PCM: FIRST CMES RFCURDS RUG M-MI TUBE NT anu an (an: 4; Prmritnd by GSA. use! ICMH FIRMR HI AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classi?ed Information to Wikileaks DATE: 23 September 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: SF 600 SU MMARY: Appointment at Behavioral Health at Fort Drum. Session for 60 minutes and released without limitations. ManningB_00014G?B RECORD or EDICAL (ARE. Patient MANNING. BRADLEY EDWARD Date. 23 Sap 21309 1001!] EDT App! Type EST Twatmem Facilny: GUTHRIE AHC Chm: CLINIC Prev-?den Pailent Status Outpatient Spunmr?iSN: MANNING. BRADLEY Rank PRIVATE CLASS mu Outpl Rec Rm: RECORDS tPLv?diW} ACCESS Pruitt-flanDERALLAW VIOLATDHS WILL BE PRUSECU HI 0-: EA LTH RECON CIIRONOLOGICAL RECORD OF SmnaurISSN: BRADLEY Hunk FRI FIRST {1.41.511 Hm: 'J'Ulpl Rec. Hm RECORDS pm- T'vi' REC MEDICAL CARE. STANDARD FORM buu (REV. IN THIS [3 PRO Et'Ti-? HY THF PRIVACY 191-1 UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS b30514 Ird THIS DP FEDERAL LAW. CF50 ml-JiM? s. AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classi?ed Information to Wikileaks DATE: 29 September 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Appointment at Behavioral Health at Fort Drum. Session for 60 minutes and released without limitations. ManningB_OOD14031 Ci?DNOL-ogge ric??j?iilicih?hi? Palienl: MANNING. BRADLEY EDWARD Trealmani Facihly' GUTHRJE Patient Slams: Outpatient Date 15 Sup 2009 DQUD EDT Crime; CLINIC Spunwr?SSN- Raul..- Llnil Duml Rec. Rm: FEM: Appl Type EST pTD-Ja?el' GRETSCH.JOSEPH MANNING. BRADLFY EDWAR CLASS M. RECORD OF MEDICAL CARE THIS INFORMATHLIN I5 PROTECTED Hf THE PRIVACY ACI FEDERHL LAW WDLATCRS . ManningBrUOU?l 4082 mm.an GDIHREL 5; E?r?tribd In Illd FIRMR HEMJEBEFURD 29 5c 1009 0345 Qinowowqrm Ryan? 0E . Spun-5m ISSN ?nk. Hr: il Dulpt Rea: Rm: FEM: Tel FEM. Tl IIS INFORMATION lb PRU [13' THE PRIVACY ACT I974 UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TIT) THIS :5 UF FEDERAL LAW. Vl?ll? TORS WILL BF MANNING. Emmi? PRIVATE FIRST RECUNUS I?rm?bcd by USA and Im?usrrs AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classi?ed Information to Wikileaks DATE: 21 December 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: MFR SUMMARY: Written by MSG Paul Adkins at FOB Hammer. Recommends he visit Combat Stress Clinic given his behavior and mental instability. ManningB__DDG?i 4084 DEPARTMENT OF THE Headquarters and Headquarters Company, Second Brigade Combat Team 10'11 Mountain Division (Light Infantry) FOB Hammer APO, Mi 09308 AFZS-LFJ 21 December 2009 MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Behaviour of SPC Bradley Manning 1. This mei'norandum highlights incidences of mental instability in SPC Bradley Manning. The events have extended over a period of months preceding the unit?s deployment to OIF 09-10. His instability seems heightened since November, 2009, culminating in a confrontation between himself and his supervisor on 201030DEC09 in the brigade 82 conference room. 2. Approximately three months prior to our deployment, either June or July, 2009, SPC Manning?s supervisor went to his room to check on him missing morning formation. Upon returning from his room, the supervisor explained a plan of corrective action. As I approached, SPC Manning suddenly began screaming uncontrollably. He clenched his ?sts, his neck and eyes bulged, and his face contorted. He screamed three times, then stopped, caught his breath, and collected himscli The rest of the day, SPC Manning seemed to function normally. At that time, I asked SPC Manning to voluntarily attend a evaluation, to which he agreed. His supervisor arranged for the meeting and ensured he arrived at the proper place and time. 3. I decided SPC Manning should deploy given manpower issues, and he scorned receptive to possible therapy andfor medication, and sulfered no other major outbursts. To my lmowledge, however, due to our deployment timeline, SPC Manning only attended one session, and no one issued him medication. During this time, I had SPC Manning visit his chaplain at least once to learn cuping skills for anger and stress managemenL 4. Other Soldiers have witnessed similar behaviour during other events, namely counselings addressing speci?c shortcomings such as punctuality and accountability of equipment. The outbursts seem more violent the deeper we go into the deployment. 5. On about I counseled SPC Manning on the loss of his room key. The Mayor Cell required the DA4356 IOT issue a new key. During the counseling, SPC Manning shoved a chair and began yelling about the session. I took SPC Manning outside and calmed him down. Earlier in the day, he received a package ?'orn his father that he obviously found to he an unwelcome intrusion. SPC Manning has spoken of a problematic relationship with his father due in part to a physically abusive childhood. 1 assessed his outburst stenuned in part ?rom the stressor induced by his father?s unwanted gift. ManningB_00014085 AFZS-LF-I SUBJECT: Behaviour of SPC Bradley Manning 6. Between 18 and 20 DEC 09, SPC Manning?s supervisor counseled him twice regarding punctuality. During the second counseling, SPC Manning became ?nious and began yelling on at least three occasions, ?nally ?ipping a table during a confrontation with two superiors. Neither Soldier believed SPC Manning directed the physical violence against them or himself. One Soldier restrained SPC Manning until he calmed down. When I learned about the incident that rooming, I talked with him at length about this behaviour, advising him I would remove the bolt from his weapon as a precaution, which I did. Additionally, I stated his behaviour could not be tolerated, and that I would rather have a stable, unknowledgeahle peafonner over his erratic, if competent, behaviour. I gave him the option of voluntary or command-referral to the combat stress unit. He opted to voluntarily attend counseling. During the coins: of the day, SPC Manning visited sick call for neck pain stemming from his earlier confrontation, as well as anxiety. The doctor placed him on 24 hours quarters and schedqu a evaluation visit for 210300DEC09. 7. After several conversations with SPC Manning, I assess he is salvageable if he receives and actively participates in extensive therapy (at least once to twice a week on an inde?nite basis}, coupled with responsive evaluations, medication and follow?up adjustments on dosages. Based on my limited knowledge of SPC Manning, I assess he suffers thorn acute post-traumatic stress disorder developed during his abusive childhood. He may also suffer ?our a form of anxiety disorder. He states regularly he never believes he is a success despite frequent comments to him regarding his competence as an intelligence analyst. I regularly see him outside his quarters during off-time wh he should be sleeping. He reports it is almoSI impossible for him to sleep due to anxiety regarding reporting late to work. 8. SPC Manning stated repeatedly that he does not feel he has any problems, and therapy will be oflittle to no value He stated he trusts virtually no therapists, and seems to feel disdain for them. He is extremely guarded concerning certain aspects of his private life, and compartmentalizes what information he will and will not share with others. What he does not share seems to add a signi?cant mount of internal pressure and anxiety for SPC Manning. He seems to be a conglomeraticn of ambition, egression and deep?seated insecurity. orandum is the undersigned, a? PAUL DAVID ADKINS MSG, USA Master Sergeant ManningB_00014086 AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classi?ed Information to Wikileaks DATE: 24 December 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Command-directed evaluation at Combat Stress Clinic at FOB Hammer. evaluation and released without limitations. ManningB_00014087 JEF-w'ti EEC: BIL 9r 503m 1. Mm Patiem BRADLEY Due. 24 DEC 2009 1799 AST Facility Clinic: CUM EAT STRESS Clinic} AppITypc: RUUTN Frau-idea LEIBMAN. MARTIN Smnwu??iN EDWAR Rank PRIVATE FIRST CLABB 1er. Uulpl Rte Rm RECOHDE FEM: Tel REC I1 l- Diff-U. CARE . TANDARD FORM ?ll} (REV. 5! THIS If: BY THE PHVACY ACTCIF ACCESS Prmrihrd by CEA and 111'. ME TO THIS HUN :5 fl. OF FEDERAL LAW WILL HF FIR-HR HI 10'45-535 ru?lanningBJUUfH 4088 RECORD 7' LI Dec 1009 IBM CHROHOLOCICAL MANNING Rank PRIVATF FIRST CLASS Uni! Wl? CD Uutpl Rec. Rm- RECORDS ROOM-MI STUDENI PPM. 'Icl PCM (ARE STANDARD FORM PRQVACY OF LINAU ACCESS Pf?rril?ard b; GSA um! ICMR [0 THIS IS A. VIOLATION CF LAW 1 5R5 WILL HF. FTFH-IR HI (TR 10545?505 ManningB_00014089 AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classi?ed Information to Wikileaks DATE: 25 December 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: MEDCOM 4038 SUMMARY: Report of Mental Status Exam. Meets retention requirements but needs further examination. ManningB_UOD1l4090 REPORT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH EVALUATION For as: ofthil Form. MEDCOM 4043; The In may is MEDCOM NAME: MANNING. BRADLEY GRADE: E4 REASON FOR BH EVALUATION ManningEi-_ODU14DQ1 ManningB_OGD14092 AR 15?6 Report Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks DATE: 30 December 2009 PAGES: 2 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Seen as a referral from previous provider at Combat Stress Clinic at FOB Hammer. Released without limitation with foilow up in one week. am}. Patient: HANMNG. BRADLEY Dale: Dec 2009 1541 App: Type: HDUTN Facililgpl WSFSAI Cuntc. COMBAT STRESS Provider WORSLEY. MICHAEL MANNING, BRADLEY flan}. FIRST CLASS (Jutpl?cc Flu] TelSTAVUAHCI I-EJHM IHIS .5 paunztnan Lw nus. ACT or NH {'le Prmribed um mm: HHS 7101-; I5 CJF FEDERAL LAW WILL uL-l PROSECUTED HI Man ningB?OW 4094 HEALTH ?Jll Dec 2009 16-11 Fuilir} ManningB_00014095 {'linh?t [hum WSFSAI CHRONOLOGICAL RECORD OF 5112:3125}, mm: htilzr I?m-rider RECORD OF THIS IS 57.23 RY THE: PRIVAFY Arr WE- IGM #3579] ACCESS r5 A UF FEDERAL LAW VIOLA. WIJ. BE Rani ljmr. (Jun-I: Rec Elna: TEI. MANNING. BRADLEY CLASS RECORDS ROOM-MI STUDENT CLINIC FORM {ulr? IREV. I?ru-crilrdn} USA and AR 15?5 Report Compromise of Classi?ed Information to Wikileaks DATE: 6 January 2010 PAGES: 1 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Appointment at Combat Stress Clinic at FOB Hammer. Released without limitations with follow-up in one week. ManningB_DUU14096 {135mm Rlagonn i CHRONOLOGICAL RECORD OF MEDICAL CA RE Patient: MANNING, BRADLEY [3313205 Jan 201? 1613 AST Facilrly: RDUTN Clinic; COMBAT STRESS Clinic Provider: MICH AEL N51 BRAD LE I1 5939' Ran PRIVA TE IRET Ur. rz Quip: Rt? Rm: RECORDS STUDENT Tel FCM: STANDARD FORM ?uu mews; THIS WFORMATION IS PROTECTED BYTHE PRIVACY UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS Prestrila-l-d by USA. Ind if. A VIOLATICINOF FEDERALLAW. WILL BE PROSECUTED. FIHMH (fl-'51 n. Man AR 15?6 Report Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks DATE: 16 February 2010 PAGES: 1 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Appointment at Combat Stress Ciinic at FOB Hammer. Released without Iimitations with follow-up in two weeks. HEALTH RLCORQ WSFSAI Patient. MANNING, BRADLEY Ti ?5 INFURMA FICN IS PROTECTED BY 1 HE PRIVACY ACT 570}. TU '75 EM IS VIOLATION 0F FEDERAL LAW WILL BF ManningB_OOD14099 RECORD MHHII HRONOLOGICAL RECORD Date. 16 Feb 2019 1506 AST Chm: COMBAT STRESS CIinlc App! Type: ROUTH P'Gvidar WORSLEY. MICHAEL 5nomm?SSN Rank Hull. Hull}! Rut: Rm Tc' BRADLEY FE FIRST CLASS RECORDS CLINIC l?rm?btd by USA End FIRMR HI Ill-(uni t. AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks DATE: 2 March 2010 PAGES: 1 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Appointment at Combat Stress Clinic at FOB Hammer. Released without limitations with follow-up in two weeks. ManningB_00014100 CH m:m0u?u?:1m yggconng?l DICAL RE Patren! MANNING. BRADLEY 0519.. 02 Ha: 201131356 AST Faciily WSFSAI ROUTN Elli-11c. COMBAT STRESS Clinic Provider: WORSLEY, MICHAEL 3;;10'1 Siva-V5151? MAHNSHEJ, rm. EDWA ?ank Uml 113..th Ru: Hm' HUHM-MI STUDENT L?l 'i?cl REC OED (1F MEIHCAL Il'r?lHE F-?h FORM 4500 EH E15. 5] UH 71V rm. PRIVACY 19M IN ACCESS 9'5!le MR Ti} Ilfl? IS A VIDIATJDN OT- FEDFRM 1 AW VIULATORH WIH BF. PROHFCUTED Hi AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks DATE: 16 March 2010 PAGES: 1 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Appointment at Combat Stress Clinic at FOB Hammer. Released without limitations with follow-up in one week. ManningB_DDO' 4102 ?gcogp CHRONOLOGICAL u? Pahent' MANNING. BRADLEY Dale. 16 Mat 2010 150? AST App: Type ROUTN Faci?ly Clinic. CUHBAT STRESS Clinic Provider: WORSLEY. MICHAEL BRAD: FY Hank PRIVATE FIRST (1:155 [5 EC (Julpl RC1: Rm FEM: . . . Tc} RECORD OF AHMED FORM Mil (RI-ix uv THE 01- vm min-511m mum-:5 M'st mm: THIS [NI-(mm TIOH vuuquow or FEDERAL LAW mu. m: FRI 353-15 AR 15-6 Report Compromise of Classi?ed Information to Wikiiea ks DATE: 23 March 2010 PAGES: 1 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Appointment at Combat Stress Clinic at FOB Hammer. Released without limitations with follow-up in one week. ManningEi_?O?1410d HEQOKD CHRONOLOGICAL RECORD OF Pam-n. MANNING. BRADLEY Dale 1.3 Mar 20101453 Appt Type? ROUTE Faciin WEFSAI Clint: COMBAT STRESS Clinic Draw-lam: WOHSLEY. MICHAEL MANNING BRADLEY Rank PRIVATE FIRE Unn' Uuipl Hm HTL TUI-LNT PC31- AL a?cmm (REV. 53 mi}, mm Tr THE-I PRIVACY OF 1:74 Prbniba! h: GSA and ?Mn Ii.) I HZS l3 A 0? WULATURS ?111.55: PHD-IF HI (FRI Iii-45.505 ManningB_UUO14105 AR 15?6 Report Compromise of Classified Information to Wikileaks DATE: 30 March 2010 PAGES: 1 FORM: SF 600 SUMMARY: Appointment at Combat Stress Clinic at FOB Hammer. Released without limitations with follow-up in one week. ManningB_DDOi41i}5 Lj?HF?fgl?) RECOQQ or'??nic? CARE Palienl: MANNING, BRADLEY Dale. 30 Mar 20101604 AST App! Type. ROUTN Facility WSFSAI cum:- COMBAT STRESS Clinic Provider. WURSLET. MICHAEL (HAMMER) MANNING. BRADLEY 5939Silnl Rank PRIVATE FIRST CLASS [mm Ru Rm Rtme-MI F: RIDE-NT CLINIC PCM 1c! PCM mama? . "Mu. . (.mmEv. 5] THIS PROTECTED BY THE ACTOF W74 (PLJEI-STW UNAUTHURIZED I?mhhed hr GSA mu H515 OF LAW VIOLATURS WILL 33F. Hi A a 00337 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING AND ARRANGING RECORD OF TRIAL USE OF FORM Use this form and MOM, 1984, Appendix 14, will be used by the trial counsel and the reporter as a guide to the preparation of the record of trial in general and special court?martial cases in which a verbatim record is prepared. Air Force uses this form and departmental instructions as a guide to the preparation of the record of trial in general and special court?martial cases in which a summarized record is authorized. Army and Navy use DD Form 491 for records of trial in general and special court?martial cases in which a summarized record is authorized. lnapplicable words of the printed text will be deleted. COPIES See MOM, 1984, RCM 1103(g). The convening authority may direct the preparation of additional copies. ARRANGEMENT When forwarded to the appropriate Judge Advocate General or for judge advocate review pursuant to Article 64(a), the record will be arranged and bound with allied papers in the sequence indicated below. Trial counsel is responsible for arranging the record as indicated, except that items 6, 7, and 15e will be inserted by the convening or reviewing authority, as appropriate, and items 10 and 14 will be inserted by either trial counsel or the convening or reviewing authority, whichever has custody of them. 1. Front cover and inside front cover (chronology sheet) of DD Form 490. 2. Judge advocate's review pursuant to Article 64(a), if any. 3. Request of accused for appellate defense counsel, or waiver/withdrawal of appellate rights, if applicable. 4. Briefs of counsel submitted after trial, if any (Article 5. DD Form 494, "Court?Martial Data Sheet." 6. Court?martial orders promulgating the result of trial as to each accused, in 10 copies when the record is verbatim and in 4 copies when it is summarized. 7. When required, signed recommendation of staff judge advocate or legal officer, in duplicate, together with all clemency papers, including clemency recommendations by court members. 8. Matters submitted by the accused pursuant to Article 60 (MOM, 1984, RCM 1105). 9. DD Form 458, "Charge Sheet" (unless included at the point of arraignment in the record). 10. Congressional inquiries and replies, if any. 11. DD Form 457, "Investigating Officer's Report," pursuant to Article 32, if such investigation was conducted, followed by any other papers which accompanied the charges when referred for trial, unless included in the record of trial proper. 12. Advice of staff judge advocate or legal officer, when prepared pursuant to Article 34 or otherwise. 13. Requests by counsel and action of the convening authority taken thereon requests concerning delay, witnesses and depositions). 14. Records of former trials. 15. Record of trial in the following order: a. Errata sheet, if any. b. lndex sheet with reverse side containing receipt of accused or defense counsel for copy of record or certificate in lieu of receipt. c. Record of proceedings in court, including Article 39(a) sessions, if any. d. Authentication sheet, followed by certificate of correction, if any. e. Action of convening authority and, if appro? priate, action of officer exercising general court? martial jurisdiction. f. Exhibits admitted in evidence. g. Exhibits not received in evidence. The page of the record of trial where each exhibit was offered and rejected will be noted on the front of each exhibit. h. Appellate exhibits, such as proposed in? structions, written offers of proof or preliminary evidence (real or documentary), and briefs of counsel submitted at trial. DD FORM 490, MAY 2000 Inside of Back Cover